The way things stand right now, I don't see many (if any) drow warriors on when doing a "who" command. I've heard a few people mention that the addition of a drow anti-ranger type class would be cool.
The answer is enhancing the drow warrior. In all the FR books I ever read, many of the drow warriors dual wielded. I think drow warriors should be able to master the dual wield/double attack skills. I don't know if they can or not already, but I think it's a good idea. IMHO A Drow warrior should fight as well when dual wielding as a ranger. This does not overpower drow warriors as a damage/tank class, because when dual wielding they lose the shieldblock skill. Obviously a drow doesn't have as many hps as a troll/ogre either.
I don't know if it is possible, but the addition of archery to the drow warrior makes sense as well, as most drow warriors used handcrossbows. This should be limited though, drow warriors wouldn't be the masters of the bow & arrow that rangers are.
All of these ideas are strictly FR based, and may not even be possible, but I think they would add alot of flavor to the dark elf warrior. I'd expect to see a few more people playing drow warriors also.
- Nalar -
The Drow Anti-Ranger Answer
I just find it amusing that in DK we have a mob called "Drow Archers" yet there are no drow that can use a bow or crossbow.
In 3rd Ed evil rangers are allowed.
There are code difficulties to improving drow warriors and, further, it makes them another subclass. Complexity is the enemy of balance (just ask any Utopia player).
------------------
Elseenas of No House Worth Mentioning
In 3rd Ed evil rangers are allowed.
There are code difficulties to improving drow warriors and, further, it makes them another subclass. Complexity is the enemy of balance (just ask any Utopia player).
------------------
Elseenas of No House Worth Mentioning
-
Thorlin
- Sojourner
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2001 5:01 am
- Location: Fort Bragg, North Carolina, USA
- Contact:
I can see this starting a debate, but i've got nothin better to do so hey 
As someone said in the post, 3rd ed allows for evil rangers, many other rpg's allow for evil rangers.. its just a matter of intent, Rangers don't uphold good, justice, etc.. thats for paladins, all they care about is their forest (or domain or wherever). While I share the opinion that Rangers can be of good or evil persuasion, is this gonna create another balance issue?.. It seems like everytime something changes theres a "evils dont get this goodies get that" So what happens when Evil's get their ranger counterpart and Goodies still don't have their psionicists? or goodies get psionicists and evil's dont have druids.. the list goes on forever.. I would rather see Drow Warrior's improved as Nalar mentioned to mirror those of FR.
As someone said in the post, 3rd ed allows for evil rangers, many other rpg's allow for evil rangers.. its just a matter of intent, Rangers don't uphold good, justice, etc.. thats for paladins, all they care about is their forest (or domain or wherever). While I share the opinion that Rangers can be of good or evil persuasion, is this gonna create another balance issue?.. It seems like everytime something changes theres a "evils dont get this goodies get that" So what happens when Evil's get their ranger counterpart and Goodies still don't have their psionicists? or goodies get psionicists and evil's dont have druids.. the list goes on forever.. I would rather see Drow Warrior's improved as Nalar mentioned to mirror those of FR.Heh, I always find it amusing to see evils asking to be able to use archery for some reason. Probably cause a lot of you don't realize just how troublesome archery can really be. I suppose it would make for some interesting logs and nostalgia to see logs of various first times tracking in a very nasty mob with a stray arrow 
Nalar: Actually, it would require the addition of another class I believe. Skill-caps are class based after all. That, or a lot of ugly if then statements depending on what the code actually looks like.
Also, I've heard from some grey elf warriors that they have gotten their dual up to a point where they get 4 attacks a round. I'm guessing that drow have better dex than grey elves (there's a 2 notch jump between grey and halfling dex so I'm guessing drow fill the gap) or at least equal dex so it might already be possible. I guess I'll have to talk to Faedril and Frensolith and some others about the subject.
Also, haven't most FR books featuring drow been centered around Menzoberranzan? Where ALL the fighters are trained at Melee-Magarthe? If all the drow warriors you've read about are being trained in the same place, that would explain why they always are fighting with two weapons. Drow warriors hailing from Ched Nassad or another drow city could have very different fighting styles.
Elseenas: 3rd edition allows for a lot of things. While I do think allowing for rangers and druids of every alignment makes the evil nature gods like Malar and Talos more interesting, I don't see much reason to implement that kind of thing here. I'm not sure that any of the evil races currently implemented on the mud have gods emobodying the cruel and violent aspects of nature that would be the patrons of rangers either.
Thorlin: Many rangers DO uphold good and justice. Paladins uphold LAW and good (ie, fair monarchies). Antipaladins uphold law and evil (ie, not so fair monarchies). 2nd edition rangers can uphold law and good (lawful good rangers), freedom and good (chaotic good rangers), or just plain good (neutral good rangers). Some just don't the path of the paladin to suit their tastes, especially the chaotic ones. Others simply find the path of the ranger more useful than that of the paladin. After all, a town that's isolated in the wilderness would benefit more from a champion of good well-versed in natural lore, tracking, and stealth than a mounted knight that gets their horses stuck in the forest, doesn't realize that lots of broken twigs mean "the orcs went thataway," and can be heard clanging about from half a mile away. And some utilize their knowledge of nature to maximize their stealth and surprise when dealing with enemies in the wilderness, kind of like a high fantasy Green Beret. While many rangers are like druids in guarding over a stretch of land to preserve nature, there are just as many that use nature as a means to the end of doing good deeds and ones that fall somewhere in between. For instance, I don't think I've ever recalled Drizzt protecting nature soley for that purpose. He seems to have gained his ranger abilities mainly because they were convenient while he lived in isolation.
Ah well, I've rambled enough for now. Almost time for dinner.
Nalar: Actually, it would require the addition of another class I believe. Skill-caps are class based after all. That, or a lot of ugly if then statements depending on what the code actually looks like.
Also, I've heard from some grey elf warriors that they have gotten their dual up to a point where they get 4 attacks a round. I'm guessing that drow have better dex than grey elves (there's a 2 notch jump between grey and halfling dex so I'm guessing drow fill the gap) or at least equal dex so it might already be possible. I guess I'll have to talk to Faedril and Frensolith and some others about the subject.
Also, haven't most FR books featuring drow been centered around Menzoberranzan? Where ALL the fighters are trained at Melee-Magarthe? If all the drow warriors you've read about are being trained in the same place, that would explain why they always are fighting with two weapons. Drow warriors hailing from Ched Nassad or another drow city could have very different fighting styles.
Elseenas: 3rd edition allows for a lot of things
. While I do think allowing for rangers and druids of every alignment makes the evil nature gods like Malar and Talos more interesting, I don't see much reason to implement that kind of thing here. I'm not sure that any of the evil races currently implemented on the mud have gods emobodying the cruel and violent aspects of nature that would be the patrons of rangers either.Thorlin: Many rangers DO uphold good and justice. Paladins uphold LAW and good (ie, fair monarchies). Antipaladins uphold law and evil (ie, not so fair monarchies). 2nd edition rangers can uphold law and good (lawful good rangers), freedom and good (chaotic good rangers), or just plain good (neutral good rangers). Some just don't the path of the paladin to suit their tastes, especially the chaotic ones. Others simply find the path of the ranger more useful than that of the paladin. After all, a town that's isolated in the wilderness would benefit more from a champion of good well-versed in natural lore, tracking, and stealth than a mounted knight that gets their horses stuck in the forest, doesn't realize that lots of broken twigs mean "the orcs went thataway," and can be heard clanging about from half a mile away. And some utilize their knowledge of nature to maximize their stealth and surprise when dealing with enemies in the wilderness, kind of like a high fantasy Green Beret. While many rangers are like druids in guarding over a stretch of land to preserve nature, there are just as many that use nature as a means to the end of doing good deeds and ones that fall somewhere in between. For instance, I don't think I've ever recalled Drizzt protecting nature soley for that purpose. He seems to have gained his ranger abilities mainly because they were convenient while he lived in isolation.
Ah well, I've rambled enough for now. Almost time for dinner.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Xizz:
Yes but the problem now is goodies have more classes than evils, no ifs ands or buts about it. Evils have only one class that goodies cannot play and that's the psionicist. Good races have access to Rangers, Paladins, Antipaladins, and Druids.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Unfortunately it was evils that talked them out of making Orc antis. Go figure.
I do agree the evils need something in this area.
[This message has been edited by Kiloppile (edited 06-16-2001).]
Yes but the problem now is goodies have more classes than evils, no ifs ands or buts about it. Evils have only one class that goodies cannot play and that's the psionicist. Good races have access to Rangers, Paladins, Antipaladins, and Druids.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Unfortunately it was evils that talked them out of making Orc antis. Go figure.
I do agree the evils need something in this area.
[This message has been edited by Kiloppile (edited 06-16-2001).]
-
Salenthelor
- Sojourner
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Tue May 01, 2001 5:01 am
Actually, the dragon magazine article where A-Ps were first introduced, they were lawful evil. Always thought of them that way. house rules are key tho. You play your way, and others play theirs.
It all comes down to what the gods wanna do tho. *shrugs*
not worth arguing semantics, imho.
------------------
Malacar - French kissin midgets, and damn proud of it. Oh yeah... My comments can offend you now, I don't care anymore. Have a day.
It all comes down to what the gods wanna do tho. *shrugs*
not worth arguing semantics, imho.
------------------
Malacar - French kissin midgets, and damn proud of it. Oh yeah... My comments can offend you now, I don't care anymore. Have a day.
Personally, when I run campaigns, they are Lawful Evil. Thats the only way they should be able to coordinate in a paladin-like structure: not opposite, just a dark mirror of their paladin breathern.
Evils have no archery code, which is being improved. Regardless of how troublesome archery is (and I agree: I don't touch it), it is too *different* from psionicics to say that they balance each other.
Trel:
Evils here are a great many things that the evils in FR aren't. We Drow don't kick trolls out of our hometowns or have merchant caravans to Duergar settlements. The drow don't leave each other dead after their use has ended (which even in a city of Vhaerun I would expect, Vhaerun being the patron of assassins) and we don't treat newcommers with suspecion.
The Trolls here don't normally eat wandering human PCs, as another example.
Frankly, I don't care either way. I think that we as evils should be able to take advantage of the mounted combat skill and the archery skill. Particular so long as we have "Drow Archers" in the Forest of Mir. The easiest way to fix this is to give us rangers and not even bother with an extra class.
At the same time, I would not be opposed to a psionic race for goodies.
Frankly, I can't see any of the current evil races being Anti-Paladins or Paladins, but I could see Drow in the Forest of Mir being attracted to the predatory side of rangers.
------------------
Elseenas of No House Worth Mentioning
Evils have no archery code, which is being improved. Regardless of how troublesome archery is (and I agree: I don't touch it), it is too *different* from psionicics to say that they balance each other.
Trel:
Evils here are a great many things that the evils in FR aren't. We Drow don't kick trolls out of our hometowns or have merchant caravans to Duergar settlements. The drow don't leave each other dead after their use has ended (which even in a city of Vhaerun I would expect, Vhaerun being the patron of assassins) and we don't treat newcommers with suspecion.
The Trolls here don't normally eat wandering human PCs, as another example.
Frankly, I don't care either way. I think that we as evils should be able to take advantage of the mounted combat skill and the archery skill. Particular so long as we have "Drow Archers" in the Forest of Mir. The easiest way to fix this is to give us rangers and not even bother with an extra class.
At the same time, I would not be opposed to a psionic race for goodies.
Frankly, I can't see any of the current evil races being Anti-Paladins or Paladins, but I could see Drow in the Forest of Mir being attracted to the predatory side of rangers.
------------------
Elseenas of No House Worth Mentioning
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Xizz:
Yes but the problem now is goodies have more classes than evils, no ifs ands or buts about it. Evils have only one class that goodies cannot play and that's the psionicist. Good races have access to Rangers, Paladins, Antipaladins, and Druids.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Waaaah. Then play a goodie as the class the evils don't get if you are that worried about it. Boggle.
Make you a deal. You can have evil antis and and evil version of rangers if and only if we get great eq that loads in our hometowns, along with goodie only zones which are comparable to the zones that only the evils can do in some of the locales on UD. Evils get a lot of things that the goodies don't as of now. To go ahead and add the few things that only the goodies have would be to further lean the balance of power towards the evils.
[This message has been edited by Lyt (edited 06-17-2001).]
Yes but the problem now is goodies have more classes than evils, no ifs ands or buts about it. Evils have only one class that goodies cannot play and that's the psionicist. Good races have access to Rangers, Paladins, Antipaladins, and Druids.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Waaaah. Then play a goodie as the class the evils don't get if you are that worried about it. Boggle.
Make you a deal. You can have evil antis and and evil version of rangers if and only if we get great eq that loads in our hometowns, along with goodie only zones which are comparable to the zones that only the evils can do in some of the locales on UD. Evils get a lot of things that the goodies don't as of now. To go ahead and add the few things that only the goodies have would be to further lean the balance of power towards the evils.
[This message has been edited by Lyt (edited 06-17-2001).]
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Lyt:
<B> along with goodie only zones which are comparable to the zones that only the evils can do in some of the locales on UD.
[This message has been edited by Lyt (edited 06-17-2001).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actually this is already the case Lyt.
Griffons Nest has plenty of nice equipment, just the same as DK.
And Moonshaes and Evermeet is as hard to access for an evil as the deep UD if for a goodie. Especially now since we can't relocate over racewar lines.
/Jegzed
<B> along with goodie only zones which are comparable to the zones that only the evils can do in some of the locales on UD.
[This message has been edited by Lyt (edited 06-17-2001).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actually this is already the case Lyt.
Griffons Nest has plenty of nice equipment, just the same as DK.
And Moonshaes and Evermeet is as hard to access for an evil as the deep UD if for a goodie. Especially now since we can't relocate over racewar lines.
/Jegzed
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Jegzed:
<B> Actually this is already the case Lyt.
Griffons Nest has plenty of nice equipment, just the same as DK.
And Moonshaes and Evermeet is as hard to access for an evil as the deep UD if for a goodie. Especially now since we can't relocate over racewar lines.
/Jegzed</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I am not talking about quest equipment. Both GN and the evil hometowns have quest stuff, and most of it is either !goodie or !evil depending on where it comes from. I am talking about equipment which is there every boot, such as the pbone gear, batskin stuff, etc just to name gear from the "old" evil hometowns. What do the goodies have that loads in their towns? The tiny silver ring? Yea. As far as Moonshaes goes, yeah you can't relo over there, but that doesn't prevent you from sitting on EP and spamming gates til you hit there. It just makes it a little tougher to get there than before. Other than hometowns, what zones are there that the goodies can do that the evils can't? I can't think of any.
Lyt
[This message has been edited by Lyt (edited 06-17-2001).]
<B> Actually this is already the case Lyt.
Griffons Nest has plenty of nice equipment, just the same as DK.
And Moonshaes and Evermeet is as hard to access for an evil as the deep UD if for a goodie. Especially now since we can't relocate over racewar lines.
/Jegzed</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I am not talking about quest equipment. Both GN and the evil hometowns have quest stuff, and most of it is either !goodie or !evil depending on where it comes from. I am talking about equipment which is there every boot, such as the pbone gear, batskin stuff, etc just to name gear from the "old" evil hometowns. What do the goodies have that loads in their towns? The tiny silver ring? Yea. As far as Moonshaes goes, yeah you can't relo over there, but that doesn't prevent you from sitting on EP and spamming gates til you hit there. It just makes it a little tougher to get there than before. Other than hometowns, what zones are there that the goodies can do that the evils can't? I can't think of any.
Lyt
[This message has been edited by Lyt (edited 06-17-2001).]
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Lyt:
As far as Moonshaes goes, yeah you can't relo over there, but that doesn't prevent you from sitting on EP and spamming gates til you hit there. It just makes it a little tougher to get there than before. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Same deal for goodies trying to hit the underdark zones. (It IS hard though... I've sat at ethereal fishing for moonshaes for hours in a row)
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Lyt:
<B>Other than hometowns, what zones are there that the goodies can do that the evils can't? I can't think of any.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Other than hometowns, what zones are there that the evils can do that the goodies can't?
I can't think of any.
/Jegzed
As far as Moonshaes goes, yeah you can't relo over there, but that doesn't prevent you from sitting on EP and spamming gates til you hit there. It just makes it a little tougher to get there than before. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Same deal for goodies trying to hit the underdark zones. (It IS hard though... I've sat at ethereal fishing for moonshaes for hours in a row)
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Lyt:
<B>Other than hometowns, what zones are there that the goodies can do that the evils can't? I can't think of any.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Other than hometowns, what zones are there that the evils can do that the goodies can't?
I can't think of any.
/Jegzed
Lyt I don't need to hear your dumbass opinions as you have no idea what's going on. You make it sound as if balancing the number of classes availabe to each side should be equal to the number of equipment each side has access to. What the hell is that? It's not like pbone equipment is evil race only. All you have to do is trade with the many evil race players and you'd have the equipment. So, can I trade you some equipment to have an evil race paladin?
As for playing a goodie race, why the hell should I have to play a goodie race when both sides are now at supposed to be equally balanced. Evil race isn't for the advanced player anymore so it stands that they should at least be nearly balanced in the choice of classes available.
Who's the evil race that complained about antipaladins being allowed as an evil race option, named them and I'll go kick their asses because I highly doubt a true evil race player, not some good race player that made an evil race character during alpha, would complain about another class being available for the evil race players.
As for playing a goodie race, why the hell should I have to play a goodie race when both sides are now at supposed to be equally balanced. Evil race isn't for the advanced player anymore so it stands that they should at least be nearly balanced in the choice of classes available.
Who's the evil race that complained about antipaladins being allowed as an evil race option, named them and I'll go kick their asses because I highly doubt a true evil race player, not some good race player that made an evil race character during alpha, would complain about another class being available for the evil race players.
It came down to the fact that most of the evil race players participating in the conversation thought that Orcs would be a silly race for an anti-paladin.
As for "real" evil players not saying something like that, I guess maybe they shoulda been there to participate.
[This message has been edited by Kiloppile (edited 06-17-2001).]
As for "real" evil players not saying something like that, I guess maybe they shoulda been there to participate.
[This message has been edited by Kiloppile (edited 06-17-2001).]
-
Salenthelor
- Sojourner
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Tue May 01, 2001 5:01 am
Try This for Evil: The Anti-Paladin NPC
George Laking and Tim Mesford
Are the players in your campaign bored?
Has smiting the enemies of God and Mankind become a drag?
Now, add an element of surprise and unknown danger to your
NPC encounter tables: Let the players meet an Anti-Paladin!
As an NPC, the Anti-Paladin represents everything that is mean,
low and despicable in the human race. No act of treachery is too
base, no deed of violence too vile for him. Thoughtless cruelty, sheer
depravity and senseless bloodshed are his hallmarks: Chaotic and
Evil deeds are, in fact, his very lifeblood.
Obviously, through your many adventures and campaigns, you
as a Dungeon Master have already acquired these traits.
No really, they were Chaotic. Clipped straight from Issue 39.
My point was the would fit perfectly into some of the races because of their nature.
George Laking and Tim Mesford
Are the players in your campaign bored?
Has smiting the enemies of God and Mankind become a drag?
Now, add an element of surprise and unknown danger to your
NPC encounter tables: Let the players meet an Anti-Paladin!
As an NPC, the Anti-Paladin represents everything that is mean,
low and despicable in the human race. No act of treachery is too
base, no deed of violence too vile for him. Thoughtless cruelty, sheer
depravity and senseless bloodshed are his hallmarks: Chaotic and
Evil deeds are, in fact, his very lifeblood.
Obviously, through your many adventures and campaigns, you
as a Dungeon Master have already acquired these traits.
No really, they were Chaotic. Clipped straight from Issue 39.
My point was the would fit perfectly into some of the races because of their nature.
-
Zhadrak/Dharag
- Sojourner
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 6:01 am
- Location: Jokkmokk, Sweden
- Contact:
*would like to point out that clipping is for the NPC only version of Anti-Pals*
Again, it really doesn't make a difference. What you play, and how you play, is a personal style in your role-playing group. If you want CE Anti-Pals, more power to you. If you don't want them, again more power to you.
The gods didn't make Orcs anti-pals. I don't see why we're arguing amongst ourselves. Just don't make sense.
------------------
Malacar - French kissin midgets, and damn proud of it. Oh yeah... My comments can offend you now, I don't care anymore. Have a day.
Again, it really doesn't make a difference. What you play, and how you play, is a personal style in your role-playing group. If you want CE Anti-Pals, more power to you. If you don't want them, again more power to you.
The gods didn't make Orcs anti-pals. I don't see why we're arguing amongst ourselves. Just don't make sense.
------------------
Malacar - French kissin midgets, and damn proud of it. Oh yeah... My comments can offend you now, I don't care anymore. Have a day.
Simply put, the alignment of a Paladin would be the same as the alignment of his God. A paladin of Tyr should be Lawful Good, a Paladin of Mystra (if one existed) would be neutral good. If Graumsh One-Eye (I know that's spelled wrong) had paladin's they would be chaotic evil, and they would be orcs.
That said, I've only ever heard of two gods having paladins in the realms... Lathander and Tyr. Both of whom I think are lawful good. Never heard of any Paladins of Graumsh, Malar, Talos or any other evil god... so if you guys are gonna whine about not having pallies, whine to yer gods!
Oh, and as for evil rangers... yet another reason 3e sounds like it sucks. Rangers are good, it's part of the definition... there can be guys running around in the woods who worship evil gods or something, they just aren't rangers. Rangers do uphold good, they are just willing to break the law in order to do that.
An example:
Malodorous the Ancient Wyrm attacks Cormyr, and the only weapon capable of defeating it is in Manshoon's treasury. So Calvig the paladin goes and asks Manshoon for the weapon and gets turned down because the wizard is enjoying the carnage Malodorous is causing. Calvig is left with no choice and charges the great red with just his claymore, which breaks on the first strike against the dragons left toenail. You can guess the rest.
The next day Sarvis the mighty goes to Manshoon asking for the Spear of Dragonslaying, and is also turned down. Sarvis, having little regard for law, waits until night and breaks into Manshoon's tower to steal the spear. The next day he runs out and kills Malodorous in one hit, saving the kingdom. Which is why rangers are better than paladins.
Sarvis
(Yeah, I know... long post... but am at work and it's either keep setting install flags on helpfiles or make up dumb stories... which would you choose? )
That said, I've only ever heard of two gods having paladins in the realms... Lathander and Tyr. Both of whom I think are lawful good. Never heard of any Paladins of Graumsh, Malar, Talos or any other evil god... so if you guys are gonna whine about not having pallies, whine to yer gods!
Oh, and as for evil rangers... yet another reason 3e sounds like it sucks. Rangers are good, it's part of the definition... there can be guys running around in the woods who worship evil gods or something, they just aren't rangers. Rangers do uphold good, they are just willing to break the law in order to do that.
An example:
Malodorous the Ancient Wyrm attacks Cormyr, and the only weapon capable of defeating it is in Manshoon's treasury. So Calvig the paladin goes and asks Manshoon for the weapon and gets turned down because the wizard is enjoying the carnage Malodorous is causing. Calvig is left with no choice and charges the great red with just his claymore, which breaks on the first strike against the dragons left toenail. You can guess the rest.
The next day Sarvis the mighty goes to Manshoon asking for the Spear of Dragonslaying, and is also turned down. Sarvis, having little regard for law, waits until night and breaks into Manshoon's tower to steal the spear. The next day he runs out and kills Malodorous in one hit, saving the kingdom. Which is why rangers are better than paladins.
Sarvis
(Yeah, I know... long post... but am at work and it's either keep setting install flags on helpfiles or make up dumb stories... which would you choose? )
There is an similar class to ranger that drow have, someone mentioned it in a different thread but I forgot it. Raider or something, no that doesn't sound right. But they don't have to be "Drow Rangers" per say, they can just be a similar class to the ranger. Just like the Battlechanter and the Bard.
Here we go, found it. It's actually duergar not drow.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Some background info.
Evil rangers do exist. Duergar ranger-equivalents are called "cavers" and protect the
caves as an elf would protect the forest. They have their own set of dieties that I'm not
familiar with, but otherwise they're underground equivalents of surface rangers.
I'd love to be one
- Ragorn</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
[This message has been edited by Werg (edited 06-17-2001).]
Here we go, found it. It's actually duergar not drow.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Some background info.
Evil rangers do exist. Duergar ranger-equivalents are called "cavers" and protect the
caves as an elf would protect the forest. They have their own set of dieties that I'm not
familiar with, but otherwise they're underground equivalents of surface rangers.
I'd love to be one
- Ragorn</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
[This message has been edited by Werg (edited 06-17-2001).]
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Xizz:
Lyt I don't need to hear your dumbass opinions as you have no idea what's going on. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well Xizz or whoever you are, way to just turn things into a personal attack. Some people just can't discuss anything without getting all bent out of shape. And as for the two sides being balanced, that is not that the immorts have said. They said that the evils do not have it harder than the goodies, so took out the disclaimer. No where did they say that everything on the mud is equally available to both sides.
Why don't you take a step back from this whole situation and realize this is only a game. I didn't go and attack you personally. Grow up some please.
Lyt I don't need to hear your dumbass opinions as you have no idea what's going on. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well Xizz or whoever you are, way to just turn things into a personal attack. Some people just can't discuss anything without getting all bent out of shape. And as for the two sides being balanced, that is not that the immorts have said. They said that the evils do not have it harder than the goodies, so took out the disclaimer. No where did they say that everything on the mud is equally available to both sides.
Why don't you take a step back from this whole situation and realize this is only a game. I didn't go and attack you personally. Grow up some please.
Oh please, you called me a whiner and that's enough to be an attack. In addition you continue your post and assault me further so I'm either supposed to take you for an ignorant who can't even tell when he's attacking people or some moron who thinks he can get away with it.
As for evils not having it harder than goods, well having the limitation in class equates to having limitations overall. The variety available makes more people want to test and play the different classes. Thus it stands that there are more people who are playing melee classes as the good race. As such, there are more people who can rescue and at least decently tank amongst the good race people. As a result, comparatively the evil race has less people who can rescue and tank, thus it is harder for the evil race player to find tanks. Thus evils are harder than goodies.
As for evils not having it harder than goods, well having the limitation in class equates to having limitations overall. The variety available makes more people want to test and play the different classes. Thus it stands that there are more people who are playing melee classes as the good race. As such, there are more people who can rescue and at least decently tank amongst the good race people. As a result, comparatively the evil race has less people who can rescue and tank, thus it is harder for the evil race player to find tanks. Thus evils are harder than goodies.
On the note of anti-paladins, I'd also suggest you look through the help files and talk to the gods. The anti "class" in D&D has undergone numerous revisions throughout the years. The gods decided to use one of the lawful evil alignments.
Sarvis: Torm and Helm also have paladins. Paladins and clerics are allowed to be "one step" away from their god in alignment. Hence Helm has some paladins in his name even though he's lawful neutral.
Sarvis: Torm and Helm also have paladins. Paladins and clerics are allowed to be "one step" away from their god in alignment. Hence Helm has some paladins in his name even though he's lawful neutral.
Sarvis:
Thou shalt not comment on that which thy hast not dealt with.
In 3e the definition of rangers have changed. Evil rangers emulate the more predatory and cruel instincts of nature. One must remember that nature is *not* of good alignment and all who protect her are not necessarily of good bearing themselves.
Xiz and Lyt:
Don't make me pull out the fire hose on you two
------------------
Elseenas of No House Worth Mentioning
Thou shalt not comment on that which thy hast not dealt with.
In 3e the definition of rangers have changed. Evil rangers emulate the more predatory and cruel instincts of nature. One must remember that nature is *not* of good alignment and all who protect her are not necessarily of good bearing themselves.
Xiz and Lyt:
Don't make me pull out the fire hose on you two
------------------
Elseenas of No House Worth Mentioning
for drow, a ranger could = a raider. dont they have basically the same skills? just wondering.
i dont generally see a lack of classes on the evil side (yes i have played high level evils), but i can see the point. Im not sure that changing one class' skills would be the answer tho (as per Nalar's post) but i think the addition of a class would be not just ok, but needed, and used.
as for Elseenas' post.. I totally agree about the alignment of rangers, while thier actions are neither good nor evil, no matter what thier actions would be, generally the people on the other side of the race war would see it as the opposite, example: a grey elf ranger who stands in the forest protecting it against an onslaught of goblins sees his actions as needed to protect the harmony of the place, where as the goblins would see the ranger simply as standing in their way for no good reason at all, and thus he must die.example2: a drow raider assists an ogre in killing a paladin of torm because he knows it would kill him on sight. the paladin sees the raider as a vile beast.
evil vs. good is all just perception anyhow.. who is to say what/who is evil or good. Is an anti-paladin any less holy than a paladin when they both serve thier gods devoutly? No, of course not... holy/unholy... its all the same thing it just depends on who's looking now.
hope that made sense.. kinda tired.
Nitania
i dont generally see a lack of classes on the evil side (yes i have played high level evils), but i can see the point. Im not sure that changing one class' skills would be the answer tho (as per Nalar's post) but i think the addition of a class would be not just ok, but needed, and used.
as for Elseenas' post.. I totally agree about the alignment of rangers, while thier actions are neither good nor evil, no matter what thier actions would be, generally the people on the other side of the race war would see it as the opposite, example: a grey elf ranger who stands in the forest protecting it against an onslaught of goblins sees his actions as needed to protect the harmony of the place, where as the goblins would see the ranger simply as standing in their way for no good reason at all, and thus he must die.
example2: a drow raider assists an ogre in killing a paladin of torm because he knows it would kill him on sight. the paladin sees the raider as a vile beast.evil vs. good is all just perception anyhow.. who is to say what/who is evil or good. Is an anti-paladin any less holy than a paladin when they both serve thier gods devoutly? No, of course not... holy/unholy... its all the same thing it just depends on who's looking now.
hope that made sense.. kinda tired.
Nitania
Getting back on topic... I think it would be a good idea to make a new class altogether as the answer to a lot of problems.
_Archers_
Races available: Human, Grey elf, Half elf, Drow, Yuan-Ti
Rangers should still be given a choice to dual wield or use archery. However archers would be better natuarally better at it and attaining the skill much earlier on.
-Jaznolg
Hows that for applying ranged combat effectively Miax?
_Archers_
Races available: Human, Grey elf, Half elf, Drow, Yuan-Ti
Rangers should still be given a choice to dual wield or use archery. However archers would be better natuarally better at it and attaining the skill much earlier on.
-Jaznolg
Hows that for applying ranged combat effectively Miax?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests