Ranger Archive
Thread: Less skillpoints required for Ranger good or bad idea?
KellenNW
Tue Jul 06, 2004 12:43 am
#14
I've heard that they're going to reduce the Scout requirements for Bounty Hunters, giving them 32 extra skillpoints to play with so they have a better chance against Jedi. Could something like this work for Rangers? For example, if we only needed Scout's Survival and Hunting lines to be able to get Novice Ranger.
For: We'd get more skillpoints to play with and use for a combat profession to support our Ranger-ing, or another profession entirely.
Against: There would be a lot more Rangers wandering around, and I think this would damage the pleasure I get from knowing I'm part of a rare breed.
It's unlikely it would happen to us, but would you be for or against this idea if it were proposed?
My reply - I'd love more skillpoints to play with, but I don't think this is the way it should be done.
Nastzguehl
Tue Jul 06, 2004 12:55 am
#15
Against, I'd rather have some if not all from the outdoorsman implemented for the points we spent.
Fodder650
Tue Jul 06, 2004 12:56 am
#16
Theres nothing we could lose to give us more points. We're enhanced scouts, as of right now, so we need master scout.I see what you mean if they lowered the cost of the skill boxes in Ranger would help. But it would encourage a lot more dabblers in tracking. Up to you if thats worth while. Im not against more points. I just dont see it happening
Message Edited by Fodder650 on 07-05-2004 04:00 PM
Aenedor
Tue Jul 06, 2004 4:40 am
#17
Why not reduce the skill point requirements for the camping and trapping line of skills?
No one but a Master Ranger would have these skills so it won't encourage dablers.
AgonThalia
Tue Jul 06, 2004 5:28 am
#18
Also against the idea.
Each skill tree in scout makes sense to being a ranger.
However: How would you organize the skill tree so that it both makes sense and gives us more dabbling points?
Each skill tree in scout makes sense to being a ranger.
However: How would you organize the skill tree so that it both makes sense and gives us more dabbling points?
Owen-Lars
Tue Jul 06, 2004 5:30 am
#19
Against
Give me more things to play with for my skill points rather than reducing them.
I want to be a ranger and if it was truly worth it, i wouldnt mind spending all 250 points in ranger.
As it stands scout is a more complete profession than ranger, a suposedly elite profession
MonsofoLexius
Tue Jul 06, 2004 8:53 am
#21
Calculus_Entropy wrote:
There would be no point in reducing our necessary points...
I agree. All of our skill enhance scout trees. BH were just made able to get more competitive without loosing any of thier core skills, that would not be the same for us Rangers
Almagill
Tue Jul 06, 2004 1:22 pm
#22
TheDarkTrumpet wrote:
I'm also against this for a few reasons.
1. We need scout traps to get by with our own. I don't know about anyone else, but Adhesive Mesh saves my tail sometimes.
2. We need the terrain skills (obvious reasons)
3. We need the hunting boxes (obvious reasons)
4. Camps are right now useless to most people, not to be...I think we need the basic camps to use our enhanced ones later. If we can't put up a small hide tent, how do we expect to build an encampment.
I use the scout skills a lot, so I feel we need them all. I would rather the devs enhance our class a little more.
I've tried, several times, to do a BH style rant, but I just can't do it...
So, I'll be the sensible, mature and cuddly Ranger instead.
No, don't reduce the SP needed to get to Master Ranger, but at the VERY least fix the stuff we a) have listed in our template and b) have had suggested over the past eyar as improvements / enhancements.
We have one whole line, trapping, which is worse than useless because the stun/dizzy effect on animals is beyond borked. Camping, sorry, Wilderness Experience, is a time / point sink which, where the camps don't work, is pretty pointless.
Add to this the suggestions for camps that pop up in other fora from time to time, ie, entertainers should have an entertainer style camp to encourage them out of towns, artisans should have a market style camp to, uh, encourage them out of towns, medics or doctors should have.... yeah, you get the idea.
We've GOT the camps, just make the darned things work. Go on, give other professions a wee enhancement to using our camps for a while just to get them used to the idea that that's what they are for...
Oh oh oh, I know what our unique feature is... we can get a creature to agro on US instead of our team mates by 'rescuing' them. yeah, that is so sensible...
I'm a RANGER for crusts sake, but I get my ass handed to me on a plate by creatures constantly only to see some (other profession) stonk my kill without taking any damage at all. Oh sad, he can't harvest as much as me... which is a great consolation when am lying on my back admiring the stars. I shoul dbe like that Steve whatsisname, the irritatingly positive Australian zoo bloke. He knows the animals he works with, he knows their foibles, he KNOWS they are about to strike and can duck, dodge and avoid it. ME? I get my head bit off by womp rats.
I can forage a little better than other characters, yipee. More onions for me... But I can't make any bush medecine. I can't treat creature inflicted wounds. Instead I sit there, out in my busted camp, in my everwhite skiddies thinking "Yeah, I'm a ranger, we're the real jedi, lemons, lifestyle..." waiting for the poison to subside.
Keep our profession expensive. I'm sorry to say this but it is a bit of snobbery. I LIKE the people who make it to the top in this line. They are generally not griefing grinders and have a seriously mature and sane outlook (fsv of sane). But PLEASE, fix our busted stuff and give us the rest?
pwease?
(OK, rant over, sorry about the repetition and all that. And yes, i know am not adding anything new to the equation. But this flipping gidget of a fencer just asked me "you're a RANGER? Why? Thats nothing special...." and it SO hit a nerve. Specially as i couldn't duel him without ending up on the clone shuttle! lol)
Un4tun8
Tue Jul 06, 2004 1:23 pm
#23
Playing devil's advocate here.
Consider this: as soon as some of the Ranger skills become really useful, we'll get a lot of dabblers, and our ranks won't be "clean" anymore.
But with dropping skillpoint requirements and keeping Ranger largely useless for practicall purposes, we would be able to add more combat (useful for hunting) and keep our lifestyle (roleplay). All that without attracting any "outsiders."
Granted, it will hurt some old-timer's pride that new rangers will not have to go through all that grind...
/opossum
Phenix1050
Tue Jul 06, 2004 9:52 pm
#25
Un4tun8 wrote:
Playing devil's advocate here.
I think the BH's can do their own work.
Seriously though, I don't see the point. We should have to master at least one proffession to be a Ranger...scout makes sense. AllI ask is that we be given additional skills over scouts. and no, /areatrack doesn't count.
I look at it this way: anybody can buy a tent and go camping (novice scout). With practice, people can go camping for days/weeks without stopping in for supplies by knowing how to kill creatures and live off the land (Master Scout). Eventually, a person could learn to live off the land for months and apply wilderness knowledge to combat situations (Novice Ranger). Eventually, one in tune with Nature should be able to live off the land almost indeffinately and fear almost nothing in nature, due to combat profficiency while in the woods (Master Ranger). I think our skills should reflect more than just scout knowledge, but the transition from Scout to Ranger would be the application of Scout skills to a combat role. Thus, creature knowledge does more than give info, it allows us to hurt creatures for more (Animal damage increase). Our terrain negotiation should allow us to run flat land faster to kite other players (reflecting our near-perfect conditioning). Traps, I believe, should affect players (or at least player pets). I know this is a long shot, but it's what I believe. Thus the Master Scout requirement is good, but we need to have abilities that reflect Ranger as the "combat scouts" not just "super-scouts"
GoldMemberBria
Wed Jul 07, 2004 12:59 am
#26
I'm for it (less skill points required)
I was actually thinking along these exact same lines, so I'm glad to see this thread.
I know that some rangers were screaming bloody murder that there were *gasp* BH-ranger dabblers, well, now there won't be anymore, so those folks will be happy with this new status-quo. Personally though, I think less skill requirements would be a great thing for all of us (except the snobs).
Here's what I'd propose:
Remove the frontiering tree and trapping trees from ranger and replace them with more useful hunting-orienting stuff. Then remove the requirement from scout camping and trapping, and merge the ranger traps and camps into the scout tree.
Rationale: realistically, the benefits just aren't there in trapping and camping to warrent the expenditure of all those skill points, and after the combat balance in particular, I'm betting rangers are going to be in dire need of more skill points to be used in combat and/or healing skills. Also, quite frankly, I don't think they will be able to come up with enough content for ranger traps and ranger tents to warrent the 34 skill point investment into those. Rangers that enjoy using the big tents and traps, cool, you can continue to do so by investing in those at the scout level. Those that want their ranger to focus on some additional skills would have that option.
Edit: removed the other option I posted. The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced lowering skill point requirements for ranger is the right thing to do.
Message Edited by GoldMemberBria on 07-06-2004 01:36 PM