some ranger ideas, constructive criticism please

Submit and discuss your ideas for the MUD.
kanenan
Sojourner
Posts: 227
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2002 5:01 am
Location: BC
Contact:

some ranger ideas, constructive criticism please

Postby kanenan » Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:30 pm

SKILL_RANGER

The following is a list of all skills and spells available to the
Ranger class:

SKILLS

1st level: kick, bash, rescue, mount, offense, 1h bludgeon, 1h
slashing, 1h piercing, 1h misc, 2h bludgeon, 2h
slashing, 2h misc, range specialist, archery, swimming,
bandage, forage, tame mount, wilderness sneak, woodcarving,
speak with plants

5th level: trap(what is this here for?), defense

10th level: dual wield, meditate, quick chant, clerical spell
knowledge, sorcerous spell knowledge, spellcast
generic, spellcast invocation, spellcast
healing, spellcast teleport, spellcast summoning,
spellcast protection, spellcast divination,
spellcast nature, spellcast spirit, blindfighting

12th level: dodge, unbind

14th level: parry

15th level: surprise, awareness, *summon mount*(as per dire raider)

20th level: double attack, track, mounted combat

30th level: riposte, missile snare, (mounted archery)

SPELLS

1st circle: detect magic, vigorize light, shillelagh

2nd circle: goodberry, cure light, detect good, detect evil, sense life

3rd circle: detect invisibility, faerie fire, sticks to snakes,
vigorize serious, bless

4th circle: cure serious, faerie fog, invisibility, summon insects

5th circle: vigorize critical, protection from animals, create spring

6th circle: barkskin, dust devil, sleep

7th circle: dispel magic, strength, nature's blessing ,*dex*(think of being dex'd by having to be able to dodge trees, vines dodge snakes etc in the wild. To move silently, you should be dextrous.)

8th circle: minor paralysis, cure critic

9th circle: call lightning, transport via plants LOSE call lightning. replace with Farsee or Heal

10th circle: pass without trace, control weather

10th QUEST: LeafSpring (Ranger haste. Make it last longer)
10th QUEST: SolarFlare (Flameblade+Sunray equivalent).
stuff.
Sylvos
Sojourner
Posts: 571
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Guelph, ON, Canada
Contact:

Postby Sylvos » Mon Dec 06, 2004 2:18 pm

I'll just drop my comments on the suggested additions.

Summon mount and mounted archery - at least currently mounted archery would require mounted combat to be able to notch to 78 or so, to permit wielding a 2handed weapon while engaged in combat. I personally have never really seen the ranger class as a mounted one; relying upon a mount to get around seems to run counter to the lone hunter image.

I would love to gain the dex spell to the ranger spell list. This could well be because as one of the old school characters, and one who didn't just reroll, I have some significant stat deficiencies. Wear a sunstone to get my last hp notch, takes 3 str spells to ramp up to last damage notch. And am searching for that right +dex item to let me tag that last notch. Adding the dex spell to our list - great idea. Just wish I had another slot for it :P

I'm all for dumping call lightning. As is, the only reason I mem one is to pull mobs onto me so they don't jump my wife when she areas. Damage is laughable - this is one offensive spell that is only offensive to the caster.

Shouldn't gain heal imo, shoot paladin's don't get it till 10th and they're much more healing oriented. Farsee suits the class better.

I don't really think either of the 10th circle spells would do much for the class. Ranger haste is one of those things people have wanted, but I don't see the need. Use archery if you aren't getting hasted, or buy potions. They're 28-30 plat a pop but work well in a pinch. A 10th circle damage spell is pointless - you'll do more damage smackin stuff with weapons or stickin arrows into it than you'll do with our 2 10th circle spells. The slots are better spent at having a couple of PWT's handy, imo.

All in all, not some bad suggestions. Certainly better than some we see tossed out here.
Disoputlip
Sojourner
Posts: 956
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Copenhagen

Postby Disoputlip » Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:15 pm

I think infravision would fit the ranger better than farsee. It could be called something like cat-vision or whatever.

Yes, elf rangers wouldn't really benefit then.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Postby teflor the ranger » Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:25 pm

I love call lightning. It's like an electrical hitall.
Sesexe
Sojourner
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:13 am

Postby Sesexe » Mon Dec 06, 2004 9:49 pm

Just asking a question here for clarification.

Kanenan, are you suggesting rangers get summon mount and mounted archery like dires have?
Asup group-says 'who needs sex ed when you got sesexe.'
Targsk group-says 'sexedse'
mount dragon
You climb on and ride Tocx'enth'orix, the elder black dragon.
You have learned something new about mount!
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Mon Dec 06, 2004 10:59 pm

i agree with sylvos.

dire raiders are more dual-wield melee focused than rangers. The pet is largely for theme and to give them more melee focus (with the pet howl debuff + their mini circle).

The trade off is they are less effective with archery and not as nice of a spell list.

As far as I remember, their mounted ability is really only a function of melee damage. Their tanking ability was poor although I never did do a comparsion between them an rangers.

I'm against most of your suggested changes as it would decrease the diversity between dire and ranger and haste would again try to put more emphasis on their melee skills where they should be focusing on archery for real ultimate damage. As sylvos said, increase in spell damage would be silly and heal is more paladin oriented who get it at 10th.

I would like to see rangers get trip or some sort of "bash" skill that doesnt require a shield (since you can't wear one while engaged) and probably better if it didnt require being in direct melee (so it can be used with archery). Rogues trip is very effective, I don't see why rangers shouldnt have an effective bashing skill or some other very powerful in combat skill that stops casting or debuffs AC/defense.
and tonights winner in the Toril EQ lottery is demi belt and skull earring!
kanenan
Sojourner
Posts: 227
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2002 5:01 am
Location: BC
Contact:

Postby kanenan » Mon Dec 06, 2004 11:28 pm

nods, i checked out all hitter and nature caster skills to try to come up with this list, and yes, the mounted ideas came from dires. When I first started playing a ranger, i was in it for the dual wield, archeryu made its debut and any ranger that preferred blades was forced to join the back row in favour of damage. might i also then suggest a little bump to dualwield? When i played D+D, my ranger kicked ass, i had bladesong, i had a pair of unlitmate blades, and thats what the book said i should do, with a purchase of archery, i could dominate both worlds.

Call lightning. Infact, the only use i've found for it is to hit all in TB when there arent any hill giants or ettins or hunmasters in the room. Or a cool zap 2e of TP. I rarely use this spell, as i believe most of us do.

Ranger bash isnt so bad actaully, but No we cant wear shields whilst engaged, a trip or bash or hamstring style skill would be amazingly more effecient. I just thought using nature abilities would support a dex spell as it does for strength, as well as some kind of 10th level quest spell. make it 2x the length of windsong items/toughness and make it a reward for doing it., hence i sugested a combo of sunray and flameblade, 2 nature spells that could have a nice effect.

I do not rely on mounts much, but boy o boy, would i ever love the ability to summon a horse from the woods to carry my [blink] 3 hp [/blink] 0 Move ass outta the dead fields or tethir. If we Are infact dedicated to archery, then why not mounted archery? with a circle style skill on the horse?

Anyways, just answering/claryfying here. And i think Lors post was a reference to the fact that if some rangers group together, we are a mighty force to be reckoned with. I've always wanted to group up 10 rangers with one druid and go ROCK the mud. Because you all know it can be done.

cackle!!!! (btw, i much appreciate the good criticism here, only a matter of time before someone decides to corrupt the thread, in such case, be above it, and say meaningful things. Its the only way anything will get taken seriously)
stuff.
Shar
FORGER ADMIN
Posts: 791
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Shar » Tue Dec 07, 2004 12:50 am

I just wanted to commend everyone!!! 6 full replies to this thread so far and nobody has slammed Kanenan for his ranger suggestions. So refreshing.

Keep up the good work and THANK YOU!!! :) *this is me really happy*
Shar - Forger Administrator, TorilMUD

Brandobaris : (51) [ would a forgotten realms zombie be interested in brains? ]

Shevarash tells you 'Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down..... groan'
Hyldryn
Sojourner
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Maryland

Postby Hyldryn » Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:06 am

I vote rangers get trip AND keep bash! But keeping the both skill caps at 50.
Vahok
Sojourner
Posts: 525
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2002 6:01 am
Location: guelph,ontario,canada

Postby Vahok » Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:33 am

I was thinking the opposite Hyldryn. Maybe yank bash altogether from rangers and give them higher cap on trip then rogues. Rogues already have another way to stop casting, so they hopefully won't get trip envy. Personally, I just picture warriors knocking people down with shields and rangers to be more agile. So I think trip is more fitting for rangers then bash, but make it cap high enough so it is usable at higher levels.

Also, maybe triple attack for rangers and dires? Been suggested a hundred times, I know, but shouldn't these blade masters be touch more adept at it than others? I'm sure I'm missing the big picture (rangers = arch? dire = blades?) but every other melee class has a niche. Maybe making rangers/dires to be the invokers of melee would be a nice start.

Shrug, random thoughts.
Meatshield
Drache
Sojourner
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Bloomington IN USA

Postby Drache » Tue Dec 07, 2004 2:19 am

I believe a dual wielding ranger should get a more effective form of hitall (flurry, maybe?). I'd like to see chain lightning changed to Cyclone or something a bit stronger. U never see cyclone done in zones, so that should help. Self haste is definite positive. Infravision helps only humans. Kinda silly to add a spell just for one race. Farsee, locate, clair..something else would be more ideal.
kanenan
Sojourner
Posts: 227
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2002 5:01 am
Location: BC
Contact:

Postby kanenan » Tue Dec 07, 2004 7:08 am

Hyldryn wrote:I vote rangers get trip AND keep bash! But keeping the both skill caps at 50.


Very nice idea. :)
stuff.
Hyldryn
Sojourner
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Maryland

Postby Hyldryn » Tue Dec 07, 2004 8:53 am

Sylvos wrote:And am searching for that right +dex item to let me tag that last notch.


Seelie belt or Izan sleeves?
Hyldryn
Sojourner
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Maryland

Postby Hyldryn » Tue Dec 07, 2004 8:56 am

I know archery is pretty much dead outside of xp groups, but I thought this could be interesting. How's about another archery skill called "Multishot"? It could be an archery based hitall with 1 round of lag and no reorient lag. Now, if something could be done to prevent arrow losses...
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Postby teflor the ranger » Tue Dec 07, 2004 8:57 am

Wind elements mesh very well with rangers, and cyclone would be an excellent addition as a spell. Perhaps instead of control weather, tho.
Sarell
Sojourner
Posts: 1681
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am
Location: brisbane, australia

Postby Sarell » Tue Dec 07, 2004 9:21 am

TRAP: This was at the end of my post, but I loved the idea so moved it :9

With trap there have been haeps of ideas. Here's my current one! You have something called a trapper's kit. (like a disguise kit but for rangers). You have a chance to make a trap with no kit, but your chances are hugely increased with the kit. When you set the trap, it sets a proc on the room, that will hit any mob, on a check on their int. It has a chance to do damage and to stun normally. However, if you happen to have some poison on you, you can apply poison to your trap kit first, and then use it. The trap would have a chance, about the same as a rogue, of poisoning a mob.


I think making kick a restring of trip that does the damage of headbutt aswell would be kinda cool.

Messages could be along the lines of current kick with a % chance of putting the mob into the reclining / kneeling position and setting the according message.

So for example, you might kick an ogre, send it sprawling one time.

You might miss entirely another time.

Another time you might just do a bit of damage.

Another time you drop it to its knees.

With about the current it rate of kick, and even split between the four states so it has a reasonable chance (50%) to stop some casters.



Loss of arrows is a huge problem. They are completely untrackable. Possibly make it so that when you collect, you auto pick up any magic broken arrows, or at least have a message when you break them. I think in another thread it was requested that you can tell a type of broken arrow on examination or even in the short description. As far as just losing them to a crash, they need to have something tying them to the quiver they came from, this must already exist for collect, so perhaps on a crash the quiver just reloads it's gear. BC daggers don't dissapear (sometimes they do turn into wierd stuff tho! :P).... Even if we just used the workaround that arrows auto load into your inventory as you shoot would work better than the current system. You would have to 'put all.arrow quiver' instead of collect, but at least you wouldn't have the dread of a crash. I lost about 50 SH arrows to a crash, was just silly. Also... sometimes, arrows just plain vanish, can't explain why, I posted someplace else, if you shoot and never miss and don't break any arrows you can still come up short :(.
Arishae group-says 'mah sunray brings all the boys to the yard'
Shadow Scream
Lorsalian
Sojourner
Posts: 153
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2003 6:01 am

Re: some ranger ideas, constructive criticism please

Postby Lorsalian » Wed Dec 08, 2004 1:21 am

kanenan wrote:SKILL_RANGER
5th level: trap(what is this here for?), defense


No comments. I think others have talked this well

15th level: surprise, awareness, *summon mount*(as per dire raider)

30th level: riposte, missile snare, (mounted archery)


I can't see a ranger just waving his hands and a mount appearing. I do
like the idea of finding a horse if you need it, befriending it, and then being able to use it. Unsure how you would avoid being knocked off your horse by the 2h bludgeon code if you starting tanking, however -- have to be higher than Ranger max on mounted combat to use 2h-ers.

9th circle: call lightning, transport via plants LOSE call
lightning. replace with Farsee or Heal


10th QUEST: LeafSpring (Ranger haste. Make it last longer)
10th QUEST: SolarFlare (Flameblade+Sunray equivalent).


Sorry. I can't see much use in the quest spells to justify what we would certainly have to give up for them. However, I would like to see an upgrade to farsee in general. If you can see in that direction anyway, farsee allows you to see the next room in that direction.

If that 2nd room is dark, just red shapes
If that 2nd room is behind a door, you can't see it.
If you have to use any of the features of farsee for the first room, then it is as it was before. No second room.

Personally, I like call. Gives me something to do if I'm in a room getting whomped on by hordes of tiny mobs and I ran out of everything else.

Farsee .... *shrug*
Heal *shrug* I have a couple of ideas for this if really want to discuss additional curing spells, but ... I'm not seeing it.
Thanuk OOC: 'thats 6 years of hard work, come to fruitition in 1 single statement'
Was Felton Orm the "Wizard of Auz" ?

Lorsalian Silvermist -- Seeker of the Complete MUD Cookkit
Xisiqomelir
Sojourner
Posts: 870
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Ixarkon
Contact:

Postby Xisiqomelir » Wed Dec 08, 2004 2:33 am

kanenan wrote:
Hyldryn wrote:I vote rangers get trip AND keep bash! But keeping the both skill caps at 50.


Very nice idea. :)


Springleap :\
Thus spake Shevarash: "Invokers are not going to be removed"

Gura: ..btw, being a dick is my god given right as an evil.
Treladian
Sojourner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Treladian » Wed Dec 08, 2004 3:15 am

kiryan wrote:dire raiders are more dual-wield melee focused than rangers. The pet is largely for theme and to give them more melee focus (with the pet howl debuff + their mini circle).


I was almost 100% sure it was the other way around: Dires are more attached to archery than rangers since they don't get their offhand attacks hasted like rangers and rogues while archery skills are equivalent. I've never checked about the latter, but the former was one of the things deliberately done when they were implemented to keep them from just being rangers with upgrades at the time they were put in.
Kossuth responds to your petition with 'You are no match for elemental pants!'
Sesexe
Sojourner
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:13 am

Re: some ranger ideas, constructive criticism please

Postby Sesexe » Wed Dec 08, 2004 5:20 pm

kanenan wrote:15th level: surprise, awareness, *summon mount*


In terms of being 'in theme' with the class (not talking mud mechanics or class balance, just theme), wouldn't *summon animal companion* be more appropriate? Not a mount, but some animal that befriends the ranger and sometimes fights by their side? Like a hawk? Or a bear? Or a wolverine? Etc?

I really don't know how something like that would be handled mud mechanics wise, like a paly's horse, or a shaman's spirit, or like an elementals, etc. I Really dunno, so I'm making no suggestions about that. My question is just in regards to being in theme for the ranger class.


Also in terms of being in theme, the whole idea about rangers being able to befriend existing horses and use them as mounts (instead of summoning them), has always sounded very on target.

:)
Asup group-says 'who needs sex ed when you got sesexe.'

Targsk group-says 'sexedse'

mount dragon

You climb on and ride Tocx'enth'orix, the elder black dragon.

You have learned something new about mount!
kitze
Sojourner
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 6:01 am

Postby kitze » Wed Dec 08, 2004 5:25 pm

I like your ideas for ranger theme, but I don't think they will do anything to make rangers desirable for zone groups. It might just improve ranger solo/exp capabilities, but I don't think rangers need any improvement in those categories.
kanenan
Sojourner
Posts: 227
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2002 5:01 am
Location: BC
Contact:

Re: some ranger ideas, constructive criticism please

Postby kanenan » Wed Dec 08, 2004 9:23 pm

Sesexe wrote:In terms of being 'in theme' with the class (not talking mud mechanics or class balance, just theme), wouldn't *summon animal companion* be more appropriate? Not a mount, but some animal that befriends the ranger and sometimes fights by their side? Like a hawk? Or a bear? Or a wolverine? Etc?


Indeed, rangers were given abilites to become specialist animal trainers, animal empathy etc.. much like Innate Speak, but you could chat with animals 5x per day. I have always wanted to train the giant eagle that follows Keren, or the raven up in FF. Very cool idea, ranger with apet he can call his own. AND if yer elveish you get an empathy with it.

Trap: did some more thinking, how about trapping a mob, so i t cant flee? let it switch to you, but the tank then has a chance to rescue you. It's very logical.

Thanks again for your behaviour here, keep those GOOD ideas coming!! :D
stuff.
Ambar
Sojourner
Posts: 2872
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Our House in Va.
Contact:

Postby Ambar » Wed Dec 08, 2004 11:05 pm

Springleap is the roxor

but only if elves get it not humans (*wink*)
Sesexe
Sojourner
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:13 am

Postby Sesexe » Wed Dec 08, 2004 11:19 pm

Nod Kitze, I wasn't thinking of it as a reason to take a ranger with ya zoning. Just in theme and appropriate is all.

Was thinking for a minute, what if the pet they summoned was random, and had to be in forest environment? You never know what you are going to get. Even different forest areas (depending on terrain) could yield different animals. So if you're in a mountain forest, you could have a greater chance of summoning air-borne creatures, like a hawk. A swamp area would maybe be like a snake or a boar or something. Etc. So enviroment gives you different animals.

Was also thinking, each animal would be different in what it can do for you. Perhaps a hawk would give the ranger farsee, but it dies very easily? Or even the ability to order it into another room and get some type of 'clair' ability from wherever it is (this would be very unique ability here, since noone can clair a mob atm)? But I dunno really, this all might be a tad far fetched and freak people out as not being in-theme or too shaman-esque?.

Anywho, Be neat to see rangers running up to spine of the world to try and get themselves a white tiger ;) or a polar bear! Environment based summoning, that would be neat. :)
Asup group-says 'who needs sex ed when you got sesexe.'

Targsk group-says 'sexedse'

mount dragon

You climb on and ride Tocx'enth'orix, the elder black dragon.

You have learned something new about mount!
Sonon
Sojourner
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 8:33 pm
Location: San Antonio,Texas
Contact:

Postby Sonon » Wed Dec 08, 2004 11:51 pm

that sounds cool i think that is a good idea for rangers.
-------------------------------------------------------
Alysia group-says 'Lilen immolates a terrified squirrel to a charred crisp with his devastating inferno!'
-------------------------------------------------------
Lilen group-says 'where are all da trolls i was promised'
Lilen has left the group.
kanenan
Sojourner
Posts: 227
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2002 5:01 am
Location: BC
Contact:

Postby kanenan » Thu Dec 09, 2004 12:44 am

Sesexe.. thats EXACTLY what i thought. :))
stuff.
Treladian
Sojourner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Treladian » Thu Dec 09, 2004 5:21 pm

Sesexe wrote:Was thinking for a minute, what if the pet they summoned was random, and had to be in forest environment? You never know what you are going to get. Even different forest areas (depending on terrain) could yield different animals. So if you're in a mountain forest, you could have a greater chance of summoning air-borne creatures, like a hawk. A swamp area would maybe be like a snake or a boar or something. Etc. So enviroment gives you different animals.


And why the bloody hell would it have to be a forest environment? The last time I checked, there's A LOT more wilderness out there with animals that isn't always covered in trees. This is a pet peeve of mine since I used to try to RP Trel as an arctic specialist, but eventually gave up when people kept insisting on calling me things like 'woodsman' or 'forester' . . .

Back on topic, years and years ago when the topic came up, I suggested that one way to do this would be to make different animals basically function as an additional proc every now and then instead of just wading into combat. Combat between people tends to be loud and animals typically won't want to just get in the middle of that without being trained to do so and trying to just slug it out isn't how many of them hunt either. For instance, a pack of wolves will try to surround one animal and a few wolves will chase it around trying to bite it and herd it into their buddies before withdrawing to their position in the circle. Birds of prey obviously make swooping attacks in attempt to get their target in one swipe. So one way of better reflecting an animal's habits (while also serving to make the companions distinct from just another pet) would be to occasionally have the animal rush in (presumably during an opening in combat or when the ranger sets up an ideal situation, such as driving a target towards wolves) for a proc-like effect every now and then. They wouldn't actually get involved in combat most of the time (and get themselves killed on ripostes). So for instance, after landing a critical a ranger with a wolf (or wolves) might have the animal effect kick in and do damage or trip the target while one with a bird might get a few rounds of blind on the target, after which the animal goes back to being on the side lines. Since rangers are supposed to have a more emphatic relation with animals, I'd much rather have something mirroring their hunting habits and, when applicable, having the ranger join in on the pack mentality and techniques.
Kossuth responds to your petition with 'You are no match for elemental pants!'
Sesexe
Sojourner
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:13 am

Postby Sesexe » Thu Dec 09, 2004 5:57 pm

Treladian wrote:And why the bloody hell would it have to be a forest environment? The last time I checked, there's A LOT more wilderness out there with animals that isn't always covered in trees. This is a pet peeve of mine since I used to try to RP Trel as an arctic specialist, but eventually gave up when people kept insisting on calling me things like 'woodsman' or 'forester' . . .


O....k. Well I'm not exactly sure why you're yelling at me. :( I asked if it should be a forest environment, not said. It was a question. Hence the (?) question mark. You getting upset about this is even more odd since I then go on to suggest rangers doing their summon in swamps (obviously not a forest environment), mountains (also not a forest environment), and even up north in the icy tundra (spine of the world) to get a white tiger or a polar bear.

*scratch*

Did you like.. walk into a door or something this morning?
Asup group-says 'who needs sex ed when you got sesexe.'

Targsk group-says 'sexedse'

mount dragon

You climb on and ride Tocx'enth'orix, the elder black dragon.

You have learned something new about mount!
Birile
Sojourner
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Albany, NY

Postby Birile » Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:16 pm

Treladian wrote:And why the bloody hell would it have to be a forest environment? The last time I checked, there's A LOT more wilderness out there with animals that isn't always covered in trees. This is a pet peeve of mine since I used to try to RP Trel as an arctic specialist, but eventually gave up when people kept insisting on calling me things like 'woodsman' or 'forester' . . .


Just wondering--did the arctic specialist ever cast barkskin? :lol:
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Thu Dec 09, 2004 7:03 pm

Treladian wrote:
I was almost 100% sure it was the other way around: Dires are more attached to archery than rangers since they don't get their offhand attacks hasted like rangers and rogues while archery skills are equivalent. I've never checked about the latter, but the former was one of the things deliberately done when they were implemented to keep them from just being rangers with upgrades at the time they were put in.


Huh? Do you mean don't get a high dex bonus attack? Can't say that I ever maxed my DR's melee skills, but I am reasonably confident that Dires have a decifiency compared to rangers in archery and especially when you consider the typical races (elven rangers >> dex >> orc dires).
and tonights winner in the Toril EQ lottery is demi belt and skull earring!
belleshel..
Sojourner
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:51 am

Postby belleshel.. » Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:19 pm

My annual Ranger input:

1) Remove bash, add trip far more in theme with the class. or springleap!;)

2) Add surprise - an outdoor only backstab (Ranger explodes from the undergrowth attacking Mob)

3) Add flurry - this would be a skill that double or triples the rangers attack for the round, but leaves him tired (drains str for a few minutes). You can does this repeatedly but the drain is cumulative (fight going badly you flurry a bunch to try to turn the tide, but are left almost helplessly weak).

4) Remove call lighting, replace it with 'Elemental Aura' or something like that, short duration spell that can be cast on a weapon. Can put cold/fire/or lighting on a weapon for addition damage (You slash X, X is slightly burnt).

5) Hitall - Seriously no reason rangers don't have it

6) Whirlwind - hitall with chance to hit multiple times per mob, huge lag.

7) Outdoor hide - rangers should be able to do this better outdoors than silly rogues.

8) Ranger Khanjaris!

Belle
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:02 am

belleshel.. wrote:1) Remove bash, add trip far more in theme with the class. or springleap!;)


absolutely

belleshel.. wrote:2) Add surprise - an outdoor only backstab (Ranger explodes from the undergrowth attacking Mob)


disagree, we need to keep the rogue class distinct

belleshel.. wrote:3) Add flurry - this would be a skill that double or triples the rangers attack for the round, but leaves him tired (drains str for a few minutes). You can does this repeatedly but the drain is cumulative (fight going badly you flurry a bunch to try to turn the tide, but are left almost helplessly weak).


still can't get excited about anything that puts more emphasis on melee. However this idea is better than backstab.

belleshel.. wrote:4) Remove call lighting, replace it with 'Elemental Aura' or something like that, short duration spell that can be cast on a weapon. Can put cold/fire/or lighting on a weapon for addition damage (You slash X, X is slightly burnt).


more archery, less melee.

belleshel.. wrote:5) Hitall - Seriously no reason rangers don't have it


Agree, cept its really not a great skill so why?

belleshel.. wrote:6) Whirlwind - hitall with chance to hit multiple times per mob, huge lag.


If you wanna create an area melee damage skill, I'd much prefer to see it be archery based. And "huge" lag 5+ rounds is really... silly?

belleshel.. wrote:7) Outdoor hide - rangers should be able to do this better outdoors than silly rogues.


agree


[quote="belleshel.."]8) Ranger Khanjaris![/agree]

Agree. Need a bow that shoots khanjaris!


If I was going to suggest a melee skill, I'd suggest you create a skill or just grant rangers (or all melee and mobs) an ability to gain random extra attacks based on the # of mobs that are being fought. Some sort of "continued strike" or "opportunity attack" which is based on some random chance that another mob happens to be standing in the wrong place at the wrong time in a chaotic battle and lets you hit him. % should increase with # of mobs being fought and go down depending on how many extra attacks you already got in the round and should very rarely or never target the same mob that your primary attacks are directed against. I don't see why you couldn't set the target rate at 3-4 extra attacks when fighting 8 mobs or more. The "area" damage would be trivial compared to spell area.
and tonights winner in the Toril EQ lottery is demi belt and skull earring!
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:02 am

belleshel.. wrote:1) Remove bash, add trip far more in theme with the class. or springleap!;)


absolutely

belleshel.. wrote:2) Add surprise - an outdoor only backstab (Ranger explodes from the undergrowth attacking Mob)


disagree, we need to keep the rogue class distinct

belleshel.. wrote:3) Add flurry - this would be a skill that double or triples the rangers attack for the round, but leaves him tired (drains str for a few minutes). You can does this repeatedly but the drain is cumulative (fight going badly you flurry a bunch to try to turn the tide, but are left almost helplessly weak).


still can't get excited about anything that puts more emphasis on melee. However this idea is better than backstab.

belleshel.. wrote:4) Remove call lighting, replace it with 'Elemental Aura' or something like that, short duration spell that can be cast on a weapon. Can put cold/fire/or lighting on a weapon for addition damage (You slash X, X is slightly burnt).


more archery, less melee.

belleshel.. wrote:5) Hitall - Seriously no reason rangers don't have it


Agree, cept its really not a great skill so why?

belleshel.. wrote:6) Whirlwind - hitall with chance to hit multiple times per mob, huge lag.


If you wanna create an area melee damage skill, I'd much prefer to see it be archery based. And "huge" lag 5+ rounds is really... silly?

belleshel.. wrote:7) Outdoor hide - rangers should be able to do this better outdoors than silly rogues.


agree


[quote="belleshel.."]8) Ranger Khanjaris![/agree]

Agree. Need a bow that shoots khanjaris!


If I was going to suggest a melee skill, I'd suggest you create a skill or just grant rangers (or all melee and mobs) an ability to gain random extra attacks based on the # of mobs that are being fought. Some sort of "continued strike" or "opportunity attack" which is based on some random chance that another mob happens to be standing in the wrong place at the wrong time in a chaotic battle and lets you hit him. % should increase with # of mobs being fought and go down depending on how many extra attacks you already got in the round and should very rarely or never target the same mob that your primary attacks are directed against. I don't see why you couldn't set the target rate at 3-4 extra attacks when fighting 8 mobs or more. The "area" damage would be trivial compared to spell area.
and tonights winner in the Toril EQ lottery is demi belt and skull earring!
Treladian
Sojourner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Treladian » Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:51 pm

kiryan wrote:Huh? Do you mean don't get a high dex bonus attack?


Yes, I don't get a high dex bonus attack, nor will I ever unless I reroll as a grey elf.

Can't say that I ever maxed my DR's melee skills, but I am reasonably confident that Dires have a decifiency compared to rangers in archery and especially when you consider the typical races (elven rangers >> dex >> orc dires).


The stat mods to skills appear to be pretty miniscule in comparison to the actual skill ranks themselves for pretty much any skill in the game. I have yet to see any evidence that it's any different with archery. And I wouldn't call grey elven rangers typical since we have a lot of half-elven rangers too. Plus, elf dex isn't exactly astronomical either, there's only a one notch difference between what a grey elf gets and a human or orc gets (and I estimate half a notch compared to half-elves).
Kossuth responds to your petition with 'You are no match for elemental pants!'
belleshel..
Sojourner
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:51 am

Postby belleshel.. » Sat Dec 11, 2004 12:57 am

[quote="kiryan
more archery, less melee.
[/quote]

Basically in every discussion we've had on this board the long-time rangers have agreed this isn't a solution.
Vorkul Tigerclaw
Sojourner
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 10:55 pm

Postby Vorkul Tigerclaw » Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:52 pm

kiryan wrote:i agree with sylvos.

dire raiders are more dual-wield melee focused than rangers. The pet is largely for theme and to give them more melee focus (with the pet howl debuff + their mini circle).

The trade off is they are less effective with archery and not as nice of a spell list.
As far as I remember, their mounted ability is really only a function of melee damage. Their tanking ability was poor although I never did do a comparsion between them an rangers.

I'm against most of your suggested changes as it would decrease the diversity between dire and ranger and haste would again try to put more emphasis on their melee skills where they should be focusing on archery for real ultimate damage. As sylvos said, increase in spell damage would be silly and heal is more paladin oriented who get it at 10th.

I would like to see rangers get trip or some sort of "bash" skill that doesnt require a shield (since you can't wear one while engaged) and probably better if it didnt require being in direct melee (so it can be used with archery). Rogues trip is very effective, I don't see why rangers shouldnt have an effective bashing skill or some other very powerful in combat skill that stops casting or debuffs AC/defense.


Last I checked, Dires got some nice spells. Also, they max archery at 99, and mounted combat at 99. Unless there is another determining factor to make rangers better at archery, dires still have the upper hand.
Nuada GCC: 'what the heck is a khanjari'
Dudle GCC: 'it's a new player class'
Azerost GCC: 'Imagine for a second that they jammed Drizzt into a dagger'
Vena
Sojourner
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Jun 22, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Flagstaff, AZ, USA
Contact:

Postby Vena » Sat Dec 11, 2004 5:52 pm

good summary of my stance belle =), and likewise good summary of the majority of ranger posts.

i just can not agree philosophically with making rangers more dual/melee oriented when there is already so much competition in the same arena. ARCHERY IS RANGERS ONE UNIQUE AND DEFINING SKILL, unfortunately it just isn't practical at the moment and won't be until massive loss of arrows on crash can be addressed (whether by code or reimbs).


-----

yes vorkul there appears to be some factor that gives rangers a 5-10%bonus over dire raiders in archery damage and dire raiders a 10%+ bonus over rangers in melee damage (most likely due to their mini circle command). Whether its stat based or class based I didn't investigate.

Dire raiders spells are slightly more offensive however at the cost of two great spells, transport via plant and natures blessing. Personally I think rangers got the better end of that stick because the extra utility is far more valuable than the extra area damage.

Someone suggested giving the dex spell to rangers, I think they should have it in their spell list. I think + stat spells duration needs to be upped a lot.
Ambar
Sojourner
Posts: 2872
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Our House in Va.
Contact:

Postby Ambar » Sat Dec 11, 2004 7:28 pm

Kiryan is impersonating Vena

scary!

*grin*
Sesexe
Sojourner
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:13 am

Postby Sesexe » Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:47 am

belleshel.. wrote:
kiryan wrote:more archery, less melee.


Basically in every discussion we've had on this board the long-time rangers have agreed this isn't a solution.


Highlights from an archery thread 4 months ago
http://www.torilmud.dyndns.org/phpBB2/v ... ht=archery):

Treladian wrote:Quite simply, much of the ranger community DOES NOT WANT A STRONGER RANGED FOCUS. Historically, adaptability through being able to seamlessly integrate our warrior skills into our normal role as hitters has been our strong point. A ranged focus COMPLETELY goes against what our strength has traditionally been. So don't think that any addition to ranged combat is going to help the class out in any meaningful way and DO NOT ASSUME that it's something we want.


Sylvos wrote:I wouldn't use archery as it stands, no matter what arrows you toss out there. The system has some much more glaring flaws than no proc arrows. The topic has been discussed/debated into oblivion, I'm not going to go into the reasons for it AGAIN here. There are ways to get around the missile aware flag, and Treladian is much more correct on arrow use rate than Amolol.


Tasan wrote:Trel is completely correct on the whole issue. Archery itself is a neat toy, but I stress the toy part. It can be used to do some things, it can be effective in some situations, but the fact remains that you lose the ability to use half of your skills by choosing to use a bow. In a group situation, the rangers role will always be as a support unit, which is fitting by all means. It is far too much of a hassle to use archery than to have those other skills available to you to use during a zone.


Arilin Nydelahar wrote:Everyone knows what's wrong with rangers(melee in general) right now, and these posts just really don't help. Most people who've played a ranger long enough will agree with Trel as to archery being useful. Yeah, archery rules for exp. But that's really about it.


Waelos wrote:What this is about is why archery isn't the answer. It is a great tool for luring, good for backup damage on a shielded mob when the single enchanter is overworked and fun for xp. . .but that is it. And so it should remain, in my opinion.
Asup group-says 'who needs sex ed when you got sesexe.'

Targsk group-says 'sexedse'

mount dragon

You climb on and ride Tocx'enth'orix, the elder black dragon.

You have learned something new about mount!
belleshel..
Sojourner
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:51 am

Postby belleshel.. » Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:27 am

This was another decent thread:

http://www.torilmud.dyndns.org:8080/php ... highlight=

Course the melee changes (if) would help a lot as well.
Yarash
Sojourner
Posts: 432
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Monterey, CA

Postby Yarash » Sun Dec 12, 2004 9:55 am

As someone who gets rescued, I would like to see the cap on rangers' rescue increased. Their hp are significantly lower than that of other tanking classes, so increasing the rescue cap alone should not disrupt game balance.

- Mike
Hyldryn
Sojourner
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Maryland

Postby Hyldryn » Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:05 am

I personally find ranger rescue to be a minor annoyance.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:07 am

it may be hard for rangers to let go of what they had and worked 10 years ago, but that was a time before area damage or spell damage existed.

rogues emerged from this era by gaining a class defining skill hide.

rangers gained archery but it never became a reliable skill.

However, irrespective of my views on archery vs melee, tThe ranger class must evolve.

To revert and increase dual wield attacks and damage will leave them with nothing distinct or class defining and highly susceptible to moderate shifts in damage sources from a variety of sources.

For instance if you balance their damage today against invokers and rogues, tomorrow rogues get a khanjari +5, invokers gain a 50% decrease in shrug, and rangers are back to crying about their damage...

if you give them a bunch of effect type skills or a bunch of bash/spunch type skills merely continues to add to the class confusion and leaves them constantly re-defining their existence on the relative efficiency of the skills they share with the 5 other melee classes. Constant complaining every time a class gets a new epic weapon or a skill gets tweaked or a new +5/+5 warrior only ring.

In reading the forums for several years, I have yet to see anything that has shown potential to be a class defining skill for rangers other than archery. Archery may seem like nothing special just a single target melee damage skill, but its really a completely different type of damage. The distinction is almost as great as the difference between spell damage and melee damage because archery ignores defensive dynamics of mobs and is not dependent on hitroll at all.
and tonights winner in the Toril EQ lottery is demi belt and skull earring!
kitze
Sojourner
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 6:01 am

Postby kitze » Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:30 pm

rogues emerged with a lot more than just hide...

your suggestion to make rangers evolve into an archery based class would pretty much give them the role of invokers in zones, ie. just sit back and shoot arrows and nothing else (except rangers would still die more because invokers wear a lot more hp). just call them archers instead of rangers then, the cheap wuss of melee :)

personally i think archery is a flawed system because of what you highlight as its benefits. mobs should be able to partially defend against arrows (not talking about missile shield here, but with dodge/shieldblock), it should be dependent on hitroll, etc.
Treladian
Sojourner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Treladian » Tue Dec 14, 2004 5:46 pm

A rogue's stealth abilities are something no other class can do reliably. There may be other ways to sneak around and a few methods that allow a non-rogue to hide, but no race/class combination besides a rogue gets both of those abilities innately and as reliably. Therefore, a rogue's stealth abilities are unique among all the classes of the MUD despite there being a few instances of other classes being able to attain somewhat similar abilities.

Archery is just damage. Oh it has a special engine and all, but the end result is something that many other classes in the game can do via their own skills or spells. It doesn't matter if that damage is coming from poisons, spells, melee attacks, or pets, it's all doing the same thing to a mob's hit points. What about this is unique and special? The only unique things about ranged combat are its ability to range pull and the fact that it overlooks all the code governing the defensive skills. The former is largely fine as is (except for the bug that makes a mob ignore the arrows if the last one in a salvo didn't hit) and the second is something I would consider a balance issue if adjustments to defensive skills are ever made to balance things. Unless you delve into the realm of letting ranged to nasty things to mobs without being in the same room, itself another balance no-no, there is nothing you can do to make ranged unique and desirable that you couldn't do to ranger/dire melee. And unlike ranged, the gods as a whole tend to understand melee. The fact that arrow damage dice was as screwed up for tougher to acquire arrows compared to store bought arrows for so long is a sign that even area makers don't fully understand ranged any more than players do (thanks for fixing that btw Elli) which is not a situation you want when it comes to making sure things are balanced.
Kossuth responds to your petition with 'You are no match for elemental pants!'
kanenan
Sojourner
Posts: 227
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2002 5:01 am
Location: BC
Contact:

Postby kanenan » Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:25 pm

so... there are some very great non-balance intrusive ideas here, just wondering if the gods are seeing them and even more so, some godly comments.

i'd also like to thank the mud general for contributing to the thread without being immature :)

on behlaf of rangers across the globe: thanks!!
stuff.
Tasan
Sojourner
Posts: 1710
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Fridley, Mn USA
Contact:

Postby Tasan » Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:38 pm

kiryan wrote:it may be hard for rangers to let go of what they had and worked 10 years ago, but that was a time before area damage or spell damage existed.

rogues emerged from this era by gaining a class defining skill hide.

rangers gained archery but it never became a reliable skill.

However, irrespective of my views on archery vs melee, tThe ranger class must evolve.

To revert and increase dual wield attacks and damage will leave them with nothing distinct or class defining and highly susceptible to moderate shifts in damage sources from a variety of sources.

For instance if you balance their damage today against invokers and rogues, tomorrow rogues get a khanjari +5, invokers gain a 50% decrease in shrug, and rangers are back to crying about their damage...


I hardly think anyone is crying about damage. Usefulness, yes.

kiryan wrote:if you give them a bunch of effect type skills or a bunch of bash/spunch type skills merely continues to add to the class confusion and leaves them constantly re-defining their existence on the relative efficiency of the skills they share with the 5 other melee classes. Constant complaining every time a class gets a new epic weapon or a skill gets tweaked or a new +5/+5 warrior only ring.


I don't think there is any confusion at all. Rangers want to be a viable member of a group, instead of a complete joke. If we suddenly made any other class unviable, there would be whining from those long-time players as well, however in the rangers case, it's a big joke so no one really seems to care.

kiryan wrote:In reading the forums for several years, I have yet to see anything that has shown potential to be a class defining skill for rangers other than archery. Archery may seem like nothing special just a single target melee damage skill, but its really a completely different type of damage. The distinction is almost as great as the difference between spell damage and melee damage because archery ignores defensive dynamics of mobs and is not dependent on hitroll at all.


I don't quite understand the whole thrust of your argument basically FORCING archery upon the class and saying "here's yer one-trick, pony". There is overwhelming sentiment towards the exact opposite.

To address your comments as to evolution and what not and not finding any viable options other than archery:

I have stated before that I believe a fairly simple solution exists to create a niche for rangers to be in. Fixing the arrow problem, and some of the myriad other glitches in the system would be nice, however this one change could cause a drastic shift in the balance. What praytell could this solution be? Change MR to be a % reduction in damage instead of a straight chance for 0. A dragon with 50 MR would thus take 50% less damage from a spell. This would work for players as well, and perhaps we could stack MR instead of just having 1 item overrule another.

Granted I know this won't solve the entire issue, but I believe it would at the very least create a reason to take a ranger to a zone; and that is the heart of the argument over the class. No one wants to guard the fountain.

!!x
Danahg tells you 'yeah, luckily i kept most of it in my mouth and nasal membranes, ugh'

Dlur group-says 'I have a dead horse that I'm dragging down the shaft with my 4 corpses. Anyone want to help me beat it?'

Calladuran: There are other games to play if you want to play with yourself.

Return to “T2 Ideas Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests