Ranger Archive
Thread: Give rangers some defenses
Message Edited by Calculus_Entropy on 03-12-2004 09:40 AM
Well I definately think we should get more defenses then we have now, against a lot of things. But not in the classic way for all:
poison: not defense vs poison, instead, some /foraged goods may slow down and subside our poison in half the time it would otherwise take. Im sure we can all see a Ranger would know what herbs to gather. I'd even go as far as suggesting that if we or someone in our group is poisoned, /forage should have a higher chance of giving us something to stop the poison, since we'd probably be looking for it.
defense vs state effects: I don't see a reason Rangers have any natural way of defending themselves against dizzy/blind/stun.
creature-to-hit and 'from-hit': we know the fighting habits of every species out there, a Master Ranger should get some serious bonusses to both hitting an animal and not getting hit by the animal, sort of a natural 'defense acuity'. And I'm not talking melee defense that mitigates incoming damage, I'm talking bonusses to evasion/dodge/block/counter-attack, I reckon a +10 to all of em, since only one of them is enabled whatever weapon you use, +10 is the only bonus you get, and I reckon it's a balanced number since it's only to creatures.
That's key though, this +10 is only against wild animals, not against NPCs or players
melee defense: same as last one, if we can't avoid a hit, we still know how it will hit, so we can block it's damage a little better then other people. +10 is what we have, I think it could be enough, but it could be +20 without unbalancing stuff, since PvPers are rarely master rangers.
What this does is strenghten our position as animal hunters, without making is more useful by ourselves then pure combat people. As a Master Swordsman, Master Ranger, I should have less total defenses then a Master Swordsman, Master TKA, or any other two combat professions. However, against creatures, a Master combat, Master Ranger SHOULD be actually better then a combat template.
The mentioned numbers are estimates to what I reckon will be balanced in the way as mentioned in the last paragraph. It'll definately take some test centre data to make em definite, if we ever get it anyway 
I agree with GTO, Rangers should have the ability to go up against the higher lvl creatures with the same defense mods as if wearing kinetic armor. To make us no different than other professions in terms of critter combats wasn't what i expected when i entered the profession 6 months ago. Yes i have been able to solo some juevenile krayts and rancors, but it was due more to understanding what my weapon can do than what my profession enabled me to do. Some of my thoughts on the matter
Iphicles Greyhawk
Master Ranger
Ok, have to say the armour thing is silly (or maybe Tights! yes that's it, sing it with me Rangers: "Men in TIIIIIIGHTS!"... ok, got that out of my system)
However, why should a TKA be the ONLY one that can cure desease and poison on the fly. We should have a way of using our vast outdoorsy knowledge to know what to do if this happens. That forrage would really come into play if we could forage for herbal cures. Venom kit anyone?
well that's why Im also against poison and state defenses, but for poison healing.
However, aren't we supposed to be the finest hunters? And I'm talking abuot a Master Ranger who is also a Master of a combat profession (any of them). Shouldn't someone with those skills be the best creature killer in the game? not by a large margin, and of course a master fencer, master swordsman master rifleman with a 1K damage powerhammer will be better then a regular master ranger with master TKA.
However, a 'normal' master Ranger/Swordsman should beat a 'normal' master swordsman/medic/creature handler, or a 'normal' weaponsmith/pikeman/scout or what-have-you in pure hunting creatures.
If you disagree with the Ranger being the best hunter in the game, sure. But if you agree, you gotta agree that the Ranger profession must provide extra vs creature bonusses to make us better at it. You say we should get the bonusses from our combat prof. But then how is a Ranger better? a Ranger/swordsman will be equally good at hunting then a dancer/swordsman, and that just ain't right
The Ranger defense bonusses also depend on your vision of it. If you're the paramilitary type, you'd want ranged defense and such to provide bonusses against NPCs and players as well. However, if you're the hunter type, ranged defense makes no sense. creature-to-hit and creature damage mitigation/evasion does.
for sake of the discussion and my curiosity, do you not agree with the waywe want it done, or do you not agree with the core 'problem' that Ranger should be the best hunter? If the latter, wel that's your call. But if merely the former, we'd appreciate your own ideas on what could make us the best hunter.
GTOfire wrote:
for sake of the discussion and my curiosity, do you not agree with the waywe want it done, or do you not agree with the core 'problem' that Ranger should be the best hunter? If the latter, wel that's your call. But if merely the former, we'd appreciate your own ideas on what could make us the best hunter.
.well I actually agree with ya completely. I'd ideally like to see creature-to-hit (easier to hit critters), creature mitigations (critters do less damage) and creature-'from-hit' (easier to evade critters). Melee defense applies to NPCs and players as well, which is not what Rangers are specifically good at. state effect defenses make little sense as well.
poison/disease defense makes some sort of sense. An experienced ranger has a tougher body and a better immune system from living in the wild most of his time. His bodily conditioning means he'll get ill less and it takes a higher dose to poison him. I don't really mind having extra or no extra defense though, I can just understand having it. I do believe also in poison healing using foraged herbs.
The problem is thatmelee mitigation is in the game, but there's no such thing as creature mitigation yet, and 'yet' is very hopeful.
Message Edited by Calculus_Entropy on 03-12-2004 02:57 PM