| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| farinal |
Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 19:35:21
Can rangers follow any deity? Or only nature deities? |
| 21 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Drustan Dwnhaedan |
Posted - 20 Jul 2014 : 07:02:38
Pathfinder also has the Skirmisher, a Ranger archetype that gives up use of the class's spells in exchange for hunter's tricks (basically, the ranger equivalent of rogue talents). |
| ZeshinX |
Posted - 18 Jul 2014 : 19:39:07
Plenty of quasi-Ranger archetypes to be had in Pathfinder as well. A favourite of mine is a Rogue using the Scout and Sniper archetypes. My PCs were stalked by one of these guys (the BBEG's premiere assassin). They did finally manage to root him out and kill him, but they took a massive beating to do it. |
| Crai |
Posted - 18 Jul 2014 : 18:14:20
Remember, in 3.5, you have the option of playing a lot of quasi-Ranger archetypes. One of the wonderful aspects of 3.5 play was having a vast multitude of alternate-structure and optimization game mechanics to simulate other classes and PrCs.
For example, the Scout class is basically the Ranger without spells. The Wilderness Rogue (UA) and Shapeshifting Ranger (UA also) are non-spellcasting Rangers as well. The Factotum could also simulate a Ranger with some tweaking. |
| Cards77 |
Posted - 17 Jul 2014 : 21:51:46
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
quote:
I do wish they'd separate the divine casting from Rangers altogether. The divine-theme so prevalent for the Ranger class is....out of place from my perspective. They never struck me as really needing that at all, which is probably why whenever I found optional Ranger variants that removed the whole spellcasting bollocks, I always went with those (the Skirmisher archetype for the Ranger in Pathfinder RPG strikes me as what the default Ranger should be like, with the divine-inspired ones as the optional variants).
That's just me though.
THIS. I love the Ranger class, but most of the time I ask the DM to forego the spellcasting and give me something else (or give nothing at all as I just don't like rangers with clerical abilities).
Also the Trapper Archetype is especially good as it gives rangers Disable Device as a class skill and removes access to divine spells. It's an excellent way to get all the great combat skills of a Ranger with most of the good rogue skills (Disable Device, Stealth, etc). |
| BEAST |
Posted - 15 Jul 2014 : 07:56:54
Yeah, like a US Army RANGER. Wilderness survival commandos. Know your local terrain like the back of your hand, and be able to live off that land comfortably so you can fight there much more effectively than any visitors/invaders. Be an expert on all the area's flora/fauna. And handle your chosen weapon like nobody's business. |
| BenN |
Posted - 15 Jul 2014 : 06:22:30
I agree that the Ranger spellcasting ability is somewhat jarring. It would be much better, IMHO, if they have more enhanced abilities in other areas, reflecting the Ranger's ties to the natural world. For example, healing abilities based on local plant lore, not granted by some god (also, self-sufficient skills like this are presumably an absolute necessity if you're alone, trying to survive in the wild). |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 15 Jul 2014 : 05:59:24
quote:
I do wish they'd separate the divine casting from Rangers altogether. The divine-theme so prevalent for the Ranger class is....out of place from my perspective. They never struck me as really needing that at all, which is probably why whenever I found optional Ranger variants that removed the whole spellcasting bollocks, I always went with those (the Skirmisher archetype for the Ranger in Pathfinder RPG strikes me as what the default Ranger should be like, with the divine-inspired ones as the optional variants).
That's just me though.
THIS. I love the Ranger class, but most of the time I ask the DM to forego the spellcasting and give me something else (or give nothing at all as I just don't like rangers with clerical abilities). |
| BEAST |
Posted - 15 Jul 2014 : 03:45:13
quote:
Originally posted by ZeshinX
I do wish they'd separate the divine casting from Rangers altogether. The divine-theme so prevalent for the Ranger class is....out of place from my perspective. They never struck me as really needing that at all, which is probably why whenever I found optional Ranger variants that removed the whole spellcasting bollocks, I always went with those (the Skirmisher archetype for the Ranger in Pathfinder RPG strikes me as what the default Ranger should be like, with the divine-inspired ones as the optional variants).
That's just me though.
Oh, no, it's not just you.
Speaking as a RW atheist, it does seem odd to me that someone who communes so closely with nature and learns the wondrous awe of the natural world would feel any need to supplement it or muck it up with the supernatural at all.
It's like someone who is born and raised a Ford man, who saw his father drive a Ford every day of his childhood, and who salvaged a Ford for his own first car, and who bought nothing but Fords for most of his life, but suddenly decides to put a Chevy engine in his Ford pickup one day. It just seems jarring and glaring to me. |
| ZeshinX |
Posted - 14 Jul 2014 : 19:34:20
I do wish they'd separate the divine casting from Rangers altogether. The divine-theme so prevalent for the Ranger class is....out of place from my perspective. They never struck me as really needing that at all, which is probably why whenever I found optional Ranger variants that removed the whole spellcasting bollocks, I always went with those (the Skirmisher archetype for the Ranger in Pathfinder RPG strikes me as what the default Ranger should be like, with the divine-inspired ones as the optional variants).
That's just me though. |
| Gyor |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 13:58:38
I always thought that the restrictions were only on what deities druids and paladins could worship, not rangers, guess I was wrong.
Of course in 4e that changed, niether Rangers nor Druids had access to divine magic so there was no requirement to worship anything, and in fact many, but not all, Druids got thier power from the Primal Spirits, and until essentials Rangers had no magic, and after essentials the little magic they had was primal not divine. In 5e it could change again, although we know that both Rangers and Druids are divine casters again, but I doubt any druids or Shamans that gained thier powers through Primal Spirits will lose thier powers because they don't worship a God. We'll see. |
| see |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 09:19:10
Things change depending on what book you reference.
In the Old Gray Box, while Mielikki was the only listed "typical" god of rangers (who all had to be good-aligned in 1e), there was no specific requirement that non-clerics follow any deity in general or specific (Cyclopedia of the Realms, p.18).
In the second edition boxed set, rangers are mentioned in the clergy sections for Mystra and Mielikki.
In Faiths & Avatars (which was second edition, and rangers still had to be good), it says under the Mielikki entry, "Most rangers venerate Mielikki as their deity, though some venerate Silvanus, Eldath, Chauntea, Shaundakul, Mystra, or other deities", though only Mielikki and Shaundakul had them listed as clergy (and only Mystra of the non-clergy deities had her own affiliated ranger order). Powers & Pantheons adds Gwaeron Windstrom and Osiris as gods with ranger clergy (and Lurue's affiliated order is based on a group that had rangers). Demihuman Deities has Shevarash and Solonor Thelandira having ranger clergy, and Aerdrie Faenya, Deep Sashelas, Hanali Celanil, Rillifane Rallathil, and Sehanine Moonbow as having rangers in their affiliated orders.
In F&P there was a "Complete Nature Deity List" on p.90, and the box said that "Druids and rangers must select one of these deities as a patron". The list was Aerdrie Faenya, Angharradh, Anhur, Auril, Baervan Wildwanderer, Chauntea, Deep Sashelas, Eldath, Fenmarel Mestarine, Gwaeron Windstrom, Hiatea, Isis, Lurue, Malar, Mielikki, Nobanion, Osiris, Rillifane Rallathil, Sebek, Segojan Earthcaller, Sekolah, Sheela Peryroyl, Shiallia, Silvanus, Solonor Thelandira, Stronmaus, Talona, Talos, Thard Harr, Ubato, Ulutiu, and Umberlee. Despite not being listed in this box, though, it is called out in the deity entries that clerics of Elistraee, Kelemvor, Shaundakul, Uthgar, Akadi, Shevarash and Arvoreen multiclass as rangers. Similarly, Mystra's entry mentions her order of rangers, and there might be some other references I'm missing.
So, as you can see, the lore is varied and mutually contradictory. |
| sfdragon |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 07:09:29
Helm had ranger followers iirc.....
the thing is, that hte 3.x stuff stated that rangers had to chose natures deities to receive spells......
|
| Drustan Dwnhaedan |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 06:10:40
IIRC, most of the elven deities have rangers as followers, especially Fenmarel Mestarine, Shevarash, and Solonor Thelandira. |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 01:18:38
Eilistraee also had Rangers in F&P http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20020503a quote:
Eilistraee's clerics often multiclass as fighters, bards, rangers, or sword dancers (see Chapter 4).
|
| Cards77 |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 00:08:32
I would expand that list to include Mielikki, Shaundakul, Silvanus, Gwaeron Windstrom, Selune for sure, possibly Eldath, possibly Lurue, and definitely Malar.
I could also see on the Moonshaes there being rangers of the "Earthmother". |
| Faraer |
Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 22:47:01
F&A does mention 'a small order of rangers', who 'receive their spells from Mystra'. If I allowed such a character I'd make a custom spell list, replacing some of the more druidic sorts of plant and animal spells.
It's not plausible in Realmslore that most gods would have rangers or grant them spells. Again, the vast majority of rangers serve Mielikki -- anything else I'd handle case-by-case. |
| farinal |
Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 22:05:52
Well can any deity grant spells to a ranger follower of his or hers? |
| Barastir |
Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 20:16:09
IIRC, there are ranger followers of Mystra in F&A. |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 20:06:14
I just checked F&A (hey, I was bored). Here are the deities that include rangers as part of their clergy:
Mielikki
Shaundakul
Fewer than I thought. Expanding it to Powers and Pantheons and Demihuman Deities gets us:
Gwaeron Windstrom
Though on second thought, this is a bit more restrictive than it ought to be. For instance, Aerdrie Faenya has a militant order of rangers and crusaders called the Plumed Kingfishers, but does not have rangers technically as part of the clergy.
So basically, if there's a goodly deity that you think makes sense to have rangers, then they can have rangers. They just wouldn't have any standing in the clerical hierarchy. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 19:51:18
The 3E FRCS, with its penchant for 'everyone can do anything', says 'Rangers and druids have similar preferences for deities, although some rangers with odd interests (such as hunting undead) choose different patrons.' But in the core Realms conception, rangers are basically specialty priests of Mielikki and Gwaeron Windstrom, or rarely Shaundakul, and that's what I'd stick to. |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 19:51:14
They're mostly restricted to nature deities. Check Faiths and Avatars for certain; that book along with Powers and Pantheons breaks down what kinds of classes are in each god's clergy. |
|
|
