As one of those “tainted” old farts I take a certain exception to Fateless’ comments about us - I don’t need a +25 a solid +5 will do nicely 🤪😁
I will fully admit. The Way i wrote it was purposely written for Old Farts that might not have latched onto that or remember a time before those gigantic numbers became such a thing, Or the young idealists that put more emphasis on things like Role Playing rather than number crunching to take exception to, or in a sense call themselves out as Exceptions to that generality rather since they aren't fitting that norm. Though let's be honest. If your taking exception then your not really one of the Tainted ones are you? Since you resisted the lure of the Number Crunch and valuing everything by who's got the biggest number and what kind of stupidly ridiculous DC they can beat.
Oh I have few characters that walking neon signs of magic but I found out back in those days that they are effectively unplayable and run them only as nice in my own world. ( just look at that sad example in my sig). Truth is you don’t need great numbers. - just decent ones and a good ability to role play and maybe some real world experiences to base that role play off of.
Giant numbers is part of why I didn't like Pathfinder 2e - talk about number bloat, at the high end you have pluses over 40, forget that crap
I think PF2e does a good job of balancing it at least as it has when magic items should be incorporated at which levels and once you get a feel for it does make sense.
What it does do tho is make it impossible for a level 3 creature to hurt you at some point.... Which honestly I'm fine with as a regular goblin ko'ing a demi god makes no sense
it seems a lot of that number bloat is merely due to how attack, skill and save bonuses are calculated using your level as a bonus, and there is a variant rules that straight up removes that, albeit a variant hidden somewhere within the DMG equivalent. If your one problem with the system is that the numbers get ludicrisly big, then that one variant sort of fixes that (at abillity score + bonus between 2 and 8). Of course there are other reasons to not like that system, and this thread is not really about pathfinder 2e so eh whatever.
while i generally agree that you don't need a optimized character, it is very satisfying when you make an optimized character or even just one based first and foremost on a mechanical concept and then their story, personality and mannerisms just sort of "click" from there. Maybe it's not a very universal experience, but it is something i personally have experienced a couple of times.
An example from 3.5e (note that i have never played 3.5e, i just made this character build thing for funsies a couple years ago):
made a build in 3.5e that was like an half- orc who managed to get an +20 bonus to intimidate by level 2 or some shit. Seeing as to how he would coincidentally get good at bluff checks are a result of the build options i gave him, and the fact that he would not be that good at combat anyways*, so his frightening nature is sort of the result of a careful act that he has spent a lifetime perfecting, where he has spent considerable time perfecting his posture to make him seem taller and more imposing, making his voice sound deeper and meaner, his glare even angrier etc.
Since a considerable amount of his intimidation bonus comes from a feat and a special "racial paragon class" available only to half-orcs, the prejudice and other societal pressures he faced as a half-orc living in these civilized human settlements accounts for much of the reasons as to why he decided to develop these skills and why he became so good at them, partly becuase he deliberatly embraces the "look" of his orcish heritage by prominently displaying scars and facial tatoos and partly becuase when he angrily glares at you and tells you to bugg off before he does something really terrible with this knife, he channels years of bottled up anger to do so.
Oh yeah and another large chunk of his intimidation bonus comes from having a single level in the warlock class and specifically the "beguiling influence" invocation, so either one of his ancestors made the pact and that just sort of contributed to the shit he faced growing up or he himself made the pact specifically seeking to make himself even more frightening. While using this power, others get the sense that there is something otherworldy / supernatural about him, like he has some sort of uncanny aura around him, and his eyes become more yellow and yet more soul-piercing. He might tap into people's fear of the unknown and warlocks in particular by neither confirming nor denying rumors that he can perform foul magic and sometimes subtly imply that he can curse someone with a glance with the things he says.
oh yeah and because i would be forced to dump wisdom. he'd be very easily frightened by others using spells praying on his will save or even just the intimidate skill, something that sort of makes sense given his lacking combat abilities and the fact his frightening demeanor is all just a facade. He may be good at hiding it and appearing confident, but he is also constantly terrified, especially of level 3+ paladins of that edition, who were immune to fear and undead/ constructs for similar reasons.
And i had something written up about him liking to use his powers for good and believing/ claiming that evil-doers only exist because "they have not learned to truly fear the gods", something he intends to fix. And he had like a strength score of 16
*(@ 2nd level he would have a d8 hit dice and a d6 hit dice, only have light or maybe medium armor available, mediocre +1 modifiers in dex and con and 0 feats or features benefiting melee combat ability if we discount Demoralize actions, later levels into barbarian and warlock later improve his raw melee combat abillity he'd never reach the potential of "true" melee combatants)
an shorter, easier to explain example from 5e:
an Zariel tiefling blood hunter belonging to The Order of the Profane Soul (Fiend pact) and who picks the Flames of Phlegethos feat, has the Green-Flame-Blade spell (Str build with like a greatsword).
during combat, they can spam that one cantrip as an action, make an second melee attack as a bonus action and reroll 1's and 2's to your rite of the flame damage, your greatsword damage and your cantrip's fire damage, and thanks to the feat you are surrounded with an aura of fire dealing fire damage to anyone who hits you in melee, so it's pretty decent in the damage department.
But beyond that, everything you have sort of has a theme. You can use the innate spellcasting to cover your weapon in fire, drawing on your fiendish bloodline. You can use a blood rite to cover your sword in fire, and that blood rite becomes more potent becuase of a pact you made with a fiend. The Flames of Pheletegros feat says that you "learn to call on hellfire to serve your commands" so it's assumed that all the spells you cast that deal fire damage and thus benefit from the feat are indeed composed of hellfire, and you of course also learned the spell itself as part of a pact with a fiend.
so like in short, all of your abillities boil down to drawing on the power of your blood as a means of calling oppon hellish fire to cover your blade with and make it more effective.
(I was really tempted to play this build in an decent into avernus game but felt that there might be problems in playing a character who specializes in fire damage in a module that heavily features fiends that are either resistant or immune to fire. It could probably work and be an rather interesting challenge by using that one Blood Curse and possibly elemental adept (even if you get way less out of elemental adept when you already have the tiefling racial feat and would be forced to take it at level 8))
point is while you don't need big numbers and should never think that, a sufficiently stupid character build can be a good narrative aid for helping you come of with neat story opportunities. At the very least If your build contains several weird choices and is able to do X ludicrous thing, coming up with the reason as to why you spent years of your life in devotion to developing the specific set of skills you needed to do that could be fun (and that reason probably says a lot about who your character is).
Fifth Edition doesn't handle Epic Six very well. You're just comparatively so much stronger.
Good to know. I haven’t tried it yet.
makes sense given how powerful 5e feats are compared to the meager 3.5e feats
3.5 feats aren't as strong because you get so dang many of them and a lot of them stack on top of each other. Take a stack of feats that you would take on a character over a few levels and you'll often find they start looking a lot more like 5th ed feats if not sometimes a bit more. With some give and take of course. But feats also aren't optional in 3.5/PF, they are required. This isn't actually the case with 5e. yes almost everybody uses them in 5e but they technically don't have to.
I Romberg the fun a friend of mine had with his “Bodarf family” characters - all fighters. The requirements to be a member of the Bodarf family were that you had to have an18+ strength and a 6- intelligence - truly “ big and dumb as a man can come, but stronger than a country horse”. Hold him on a leash and aim him at the foes then tell him charge! And watch the mayhem. Today we have barbarians in a rage but I still enjoy the occasional Bodarf.
So, in conclusion: Ranger is not really underpowered and never was. The real problem was it's features interacting with a part of the rules that most DMs gloss over. So talk to your DM and you should be Gucci.
But, even if you do still consider the Ranger to be underpowered, Tasha's Cauldron of Everything has provided alternatives to the most controversial class features that, by and large, address the issues most people had with the class. If you don't like the PHB version, use Tasha's. Or mix and match.
At the end of the day, Ranger is a good class to take.
3.5 feats aren't as strong because you get so dang many of them and a lot of them stack on top of each other. Take a stack of feats that you would take on a character over a few levels and you'll often find they start looking a lot more like 5th ed feats if not sometimes a bit more. With some give and take of course. But feats also aren't optional in 3.5/PF, they are required. This isn't actually the case with 5e. yes almost everybody uses them in 5e but they technically don't have to.
I Romberg the fun a friend of mine had with his “Bodarf family” characters - all fighters. The requirements to be a member of the Bodarf family were that you had to have an18+ strength and a 6- intelligence - truly “ big and dumb as a man can come, but stronger than a country horse”. Hold him on a leash and aim him at the foes then tell him charge! And watch the mayhem. Today we have barbarians in a rage but I still enjoy the occasional Bodarf.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
HA! Yes!
I second close thread.
Agreed, consider it closed.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Is it really dead though? This thread is a Ranger forum institution at this point. Almost sad to see it go.
LOL! Yes!
😭