Ranger DPS and other uses :)

[Liegu]

<div>You know... I had a thought and i am sure this has been posted before but hey... check it out.</div><div> </div><div>I hear everyone saying Ranger DPS, Ranger DPS, Ranger DPS... I agree, we do some GREAT DPS and the upcoming LU will make it righteous.  People keep screaming "We do nothing more than DPS... Rangers are only good for DPS...."</div><div> </div><div>Basically, what I take from this is every class can do something a ranger can in one way or another.  How about something ONLY a Ranger can do.... How about this????</div><div> </div><div>Allow Rangers and only Rangers to Track..............  Foraged items.  If we can track named mobs.. Why can we not track foraged items once we discover them?  I know it seems silly, but isn't the ranger supposed to be a tracking expert?</div><div> </div><div>If a Ranger is supposed to be at peace with the land, why are we not able to charm animals of certain types that are of good faction with us? This might make the Ranger a bit powerful, but it could be a great Escape technique.  Use the charmed Animal/MoB to Distract the attention of the targeted one or something similar.  maybe after 1/2 life the charmed animal becomes uncharmed and you take a decent faction hit for using the skill or something.</div><div> </div><div>Anyways... those are my ideas <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div><div> </div>

[Guitar_Guru]

A ranger is not so much at peace with the wilderness as he is at harmony with it, which are two seperate things.  The Charming of less-intelligent quadripeds (aka animals) should be best left to the Druid line of work, since that's what they specialize in.  The Ranger is supposed to specialize in one thing - Ranged DPS.  The reason you hear so many people talking abotu Ranger DPS is because that's all we were, and preferably all we will be.  We sacrificed the usual level of group utility for that little extra boost of DPS, and now that sacrifice was made in vain.  The new updates coming into the future should help solve this problem, but rangers will still be what they are seen as in the eyes of the public. . . Ranger DPS.Also, the idea of rangers being able to track like no other class is interesting.  All scouts need to track though, but maybe give ranger's a little boost to tracking distance?  Interesting concept from a roleplaying standpoint.<div></div>

[The_Wind]

Shot distance greater distance doesn't really matter, it would be a moot point.  However, being a ranger, one who survives the wilds on his own, you'd think that one would be able to find certain herbs, or minerals to accomplish their needs.  Just like you'd expect an assassin to be able to find certain herbs to use in their poisons.  An idea of being able to track nodes would be interesting, however, it also is a moot point.  More so with DoF, and KoS, where nodes tend to spawn in a certain area, or off of certain land masses.  AKA, rocks tend to spawn near rocks, traps and wood near the forested areas, roots and plants more out in the open grassland areas.  Its just somewhat pointless, except in pre-lu13 aspects(before DoF), where the nodes were random throughout the entirety of the zone. What rangers need is more versatility.  I'd like to be able to use a 2hb, a bow staff, as many a ranger in past times did.  I'd prefer our primary stat to have a true purpose other than power.  If our damage from our arrows was based off of our agility, then most rangers wouldn't complain about the gear coming out form DoF for scouts.  Rangers used to have a unique class skill which was like "Accuracy?" 3 min duration, 30 min recast buff which allowed piercing procs.  The description was that of, "Knowing where to put the arrows to do more damage" type atmosphere.  Why can't we do that now?  Agility and intelligence would determine something like that.To sum it up, tracking nodes is pretty much pointless now. Allow us to use bow staves.Make our Agility worth something, other than just power.<div></div>

[Teksun]

Hehe, tracking nodes... Every other class would be up in arms, and everyone would make an alt...just say NO, <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><div></div>

[Saihung23]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>The_Wind wrote:Shot distance greater distance doesn't really matter, it would be a moot point.  However, being a ranger, one who survives the wilds on his own, <font size="4">you'd think that one would be able to find certain herbs, or minerals to accomplish their needs.  Just like you'd expect an assassin to be able to find certain herbs to use in their poisons.</font>  An idea of being able to track nodes would be interesting, however, it also is a moot point.  More so with DoF, and KoS, where nodes tend to spawn in a certain area, or off of certain land masses.  AKA, rocks tend to spawn near rocks, traps and wood near the forested areas, roots and plants more out in the open grassland areas.  Its just somewhat pointless, except in pre-lu13 aspects(before DoF), where the nodes were random throughout the entirety of the zone. What rangers need is more versatility.  I'd like to be able to use a 2hb, a bow staff, as many a ranger in past times did.  I'd prefer our primary stat to have a true purpose other than power.  <font size="4">If our damage from our arrows was based off of our agility</font>, then most rangers wouldn't complain about the gear coming out form DoF for scouts.  Rangers used to have a unique class skill which was like "Accuracy?" 3 min duration, 30 min recast buff which allowed piercing procs.  The description was that of, "Knowing where to put the arrows to do more damage" type atmosphere.  Why can't we do that now?  Agility and intelligence would determine something like that.To sum it up, tracking nodes is pretty much pointless now. Allow us to use bow staves.Make our Agility worth something, other than just power.<div></div><hr></blockquote><p>I like both ideas...I have always always thought ranged damage should be based off of agility.  Maybe an AA to make it so your agility gives damage bonuses to ranged instead of STR.  Though not necessarily true with standard bows, composite bows only draw to a certain amount...i.e. 50lb draw...that arrow flying from that bow has nothing to do with the strength of the person shooting it...and the damage from it will vary depending upon the skill of the person shooting.  Agility only makes sense to me as a stat determining damage.</p><p>The herbs thing...it is interesting, maybe a forage skill to get some berries that do minimal healing for rangers and poisonous berries that make a basic poison for assassins...I dont know just thinking out loud (sort of).  Kaeros and I talked about the forage thing before...I remembered it from EQOA...</p><p>Personally I would rather see the bow damages be based off of (or give us the option of this) agility.  Arnold Schwarzenegger could pull a bow back till it breaks but it is the hand eye dexterity of the person shooting that determines damage imho.</p><p>Sai</p>

[Star]

<div></div><p>My personal feeling on the STR vs AGI for ranged damage thing is that AGI should somehow factor into your crit chance (I feel the same way for melee dmg too). While AGI should, IMO, also effect your chance to hit (either ranged or melee) it is clear that in the rule set the Devs are working by Skill is what determins your hit chance. Ok, that's fine by me. If I've trained with a bow more than Ranger B (300 ranged skill vs 50) I should definately hit more often against harder targets. So Skill = Chance to Hit. Once you hit if you're going to assume that a mob/pc is just one big uniform thing (which untill they added crits with KoS this assumtion was the case) then AGI has nothing to do with DMG because AGI = the ability to precisely hit vulnerable spots. However, not that crits are in the game there obviously are spots on mobs and pcs that can be hit that hurt a lot more than other spots. Your AGI should allow you to direct your hits to these locations more effectively. IE higher chance to crit.</p><p>As far as the OPs suggestions. While I think that rangers *should* be able to track nodes (or at least just shrubs) there would be a hue and cry raised by every other class that it was so unfair. The charm idea is neat and in EQ2 that isn't the realm of Druids. I have yet to see a fury ot a warden running around with a charmed animal. If they added the ability to rangers I would think druids should get it to, but again I don't think that they will do that. Ranger's ability to befriend forest animals was religated to our 'fun' spell line and there it will remain I think.</p>

[Liegu]

<div></div><p>Very valid points.  I am not sure how druids work exactly, but do they get pets? Remember, the charm idea was for a shorter duration for use during out of control situations or the like....</p><p> </p><p>As far as tracking nodes.... make it based on the Rangers chosen Tradeskill profession.  That's right folks, a skill that pops only after attaining lev 10 or so....</p><p> </p><p>I don't really care so much about the issue of agi vs. int or str vs. agi much anymore, only because of the fact that if the test server changes carry over to the Live servers, there's not much us Rangers can really complain about... While I'd like to understand if my Agi really does help me to crit or if I need more power or if my str will do more dmg... etc.  If all the above, then it's all relative and the next update will no doubt just make Rangers the highest DPS in the game, while still not the highest single DD in game.</p><p> </p>

[King Leor]

<div>Heh, I REALLY hope you were being sarcastic when you said we do "GREAT DPS".</div><div> </div><div>LeoricLevel 60 ([Removed for Content]) ranger</div>

[Xeph]

<div>EQ2 "Rangers" are very different from what I expected. In the traditional world of pen and paper games (D&D), Rangers are protectors of the wilderness. They are in harmony with the wilderness and it's creatures. They are good aligned which follows both EQ2 and old school pen and paper but that's where the similarity ends.</div><div> </div><div>Being of a good alignment, Rangers were not allowed to use poisons for moral reasons. I tend to agree with this. If you're really a good person are you going to run around poisoning people? I know the EQ2 types out may see this as blasphemy. Hear me out on this. If by giving up the ability to use poison we received the charm ability, would that be a fair trade if the DPS was balanced? In D&D Rangers were allowed animal followers.</div><div> </div><div>Also Rangers could heal at higher levels... they could cast actual Priest spells at three levels below thier own. This would cause wide-spread chaos among the healing community I'm sure. In all fairness though, some healers can evac... how fair is that?</div><div> </div><div>So in summary I'd say that to increase our overall utilty and appeal, we should get a minor heal (even a small self HOT would be great) and give us a charm ability (or summon pet type skill) while taking away the poison usage to better fit the RPG aspects of the game. Make them level 60 or 70... heck even wait till the cap hits 100.</div><div> </div><div>Everything else seems to fit the Ranger pretty well though... Serious bow damage, stealth skills, and dual wield. Oh and the whole backstab thing... Always had trouble with a good person stabbing someone in the back.</div><div> </div><div>/end EQ2 Ranger blasphemy</div><div> </div><div>**Disclaimer: These opinions were not animal tested and have harmed no one in the process of thinking them up.**</div>

[Liegu]

<div>I totally beleive that Rangers do Great DPS.  Not outstanding, but great.  I always tend to do more DPS than anyone else in the group.  Every once in a while a good assassin will out damage me, but not too often.  With the timers on those killer backstabs the DPS actually evens out between a ranger and assassin.  Although, the assassins DD is much higher.  just my opinion though.</div><div> </div>

[Carna]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Xephre wrote:<div> </div><div>Being of a good alignment, Rangers were not allowed to use poisons for moral reasons. I tend to agree with this. If you're really a good person are you going to run around poisoning people? I know the EQ2 types out may see this as blasphemy. Hear me out on this. If by giving up the ability to use poison we received the charm ability, would that be a fair trade if the DPS was balanced? In D&D Rangers were allowed animal followers.</div><div> </div><hr></blockquote>Drawing a distinction between killing somebody by driving a sharp pointy stick through their skull or by poinson on moral grounds is at best sophistry. More people choose to kill themselve with poison than by impailing themselves on sharp wooden sticks... there's good reasons for that which don't fit in with your notion of poison evil, sharp sticks good.

[Steezi]

<div></div><p>Carn think of the rules of warfare... Poison gas cannot be used, contamination of foodsupply or water cannot be used... etc... its all too immoral to be used in REAL-life warfare... and the Germans did both in WW1 and 2....</p><p>I think the assassin using poison rangers pointy sticks thing makes perfect sense. Would have been a much better idea if the factions were set up like WoW tho... no interaction whatsoever with oppo faction.</p>

[Jay]

<div></div><p>I've never had a problem with rangers using poison. Snakes and many other animals inject venom into their prey, but they're not 'evil' - they're just using the tools they were given to survive. Aren't we just doing the same thing?</p><p>Besides, I'm not a paladin, I'm a ranger. As a ranger, I live by the rule of tooth and claw - the strong survive, the weak perish. Nature isn't kindly and benevolent, it can be harsh and unforgiving.</p>

[kartikeya]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Jay42 wrote:<div></div><p>I've never had a problem with rangers using poison. Snakes and many other animals inject venom into their prey, but they're not 'evil' - they're just using the tools they were given to survive. Aren't we just doing the same thing?</p><p><strong>Besides, I'm not a paladin, I'm a ranger. As a ranger, I live by the rule of tooth and claw - the strong survive, the weak perish. Nature isn't kindly and benevolent, it can be harsh and unforgiving.</strong></p><hr></blockquote><p>That's how I've always seen it too. I remember some post from way back (I think it was on the Glade), where a ranger shoots a warrior and the warrior cries 'no fair!', wherein the ranger replies that war and battle are not fair and it's a matter of survival, not honor.</p><p>A ranger uses the tools presented to him/her. Poison? Sure. Shooting someone in the back? If the opportunity presents. That doesn't mean they aren't 'good', it just means they aren't necessarily 'fair' or 'honorable'. They do what needs doing in the most expedient way possible.</p><p> </p>

[Gareorn]

<div></div><div>Tolkien made a distinction between the Rangers of the North (like Aragorn) who proteceted Eriador from attackers, and the Rangers of Ithilien who worked in secrecy and engaged in geurilla type warfare.   This is the closest definition in Wikipedia that fits my view of a Ranger:</div><div> </div><div>Ranger archetype<p><font color="#ffff99">Rangers tend to be skilled warriors with dark personalities. Often rangers are </font><a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veteran"><font color="#ffff99">veterans</font></a><font color="#ffff99"> of wars, or have lived in the woods their entire lives. They tend to be rather </font><a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoic"><font color="#ffff99">stoic</font></a><font color="#ffff99">, accepting what </font><a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate"><font color="#ffff99">fate</font></a><font color="#ffff99"> throws at them rather than rage against it. In many stories or games where elves exist, elves are (or would be) the best rangers due to their natural way of life.</font></p><p><font color="#ffff99">Rangers tend to be poor soldiers due to not often dealing with people. Their perception and cunning are better suited as a front-line leader (Lieutenant - Captain) or as a solo fighter against a small number (1-3) of fighters at a time.</font></p><p><font color="#ffff99">Rangers skills in books and games can include and are not limited to:</font></p><ul><li><font color="#ffff99">Skilled with the </font><a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bow"><font color="#ffff99">bow</font></a><font color="#ffff99">, usually because they use them so often, for the hunting of wild animals. It has been noted that this might also be a play on their seclusion: they would rather be far away from things rather than close. </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">They tend to be well versed in other forms of combat however, most notably dual-wielding short swords or long knives. In </font><a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_and_Dragons"><font color="#ffff99">Dungeons and Dragons</font></a><font color="#ffff99"> 3.0, rangers get a free feat for dual-wielding weapons. This has been changed in 3.5 to make it an option instead. </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">Stealth </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">Detecting or laying traps </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">Taming, calming or charming animals </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">Tracking and leaving no trail to be tracked </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99"><strong>Knowledge of herbs for medical and poisonous uses</strong> </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">The art of healing (magical or medical) due to their self reliance </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">Land and nature related magic and enchantments or the ability to recognize them or resistance to them </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">In some definitions, rangers may have some understanding of the divine arts, though not as great an understanding as that of a </font><a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Druid"><font color="#ffff99">druid</font></a><font color="#ffff99">. Rangers' connection to druids is often compared to that of </font><a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleric"><font color="#ffff99">clerics</font></a><font color="#ffff99"> and </font><a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paladin_%28character_class%29"><font color="#ffff99">paladins</font></a><font color="#ffff99">; the one being a magic-user, the other more of a </font><a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_arts"><font color="#ffff99">martial artist</font></a><font color="#ffff99">, but both still sharing mutual interests. </font></li></ul><p><font color="#ffff99">Rangers in many books tend to have a wide range of skills not usually used in games due to maintaining a balanced system of play.</font></p></div>

[Xeph]

<div></div><li><font color="#ffff99">Skilled with the </font><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bow" target="_blank"><font color="#ffff99">bow</font></a><font color="#ffff99">, usually because they use them so often, for the hunting of wild animals. It has been noted that this might also be a play on their seclusion: they would rather be far away from things rather than close. </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">They tend to be well versed in other forms of combat however, most notably dual-wielding short swords or long knives. In </font><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_and_Dragons" target="_blank"><font color="#ffff99">Dungeons and Dragons</font></a><font color="#ffff99"> 3.0, rangers get a free feat for dual-wielding weapons. This has been changed in 3.5 to make it an option instead. </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">Stealth </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">Detecting or laying traps </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99"><strong><u>Taming, calming or charming animals </u></strong></font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">Tracking and leaving no trail to be tracked </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">Knowledge of herbs for medical and poisonous uses </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99"><u><strong>The art of healing (magical or medical) due to their self reliance</strong> </u></font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">Land and nature related magic and enchantments or the ability to recognize them or resistance to them </font></li><li><font color="#ffff99">In some definitions, rangers may have some <u><strong>understanding of the divine arts</strong></u>, though not as great an understanding as that of a </font><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Druid" target="_blank"><font color="#ffff99">druid</font></a><font color="#ffff99">. Rangers' connection to druids is often compared to that of </font><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleric" target="_blank"><font color="#ffff99">clerics</font></a><font color="#ffff99"> and </font><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paladin_%28character_class%29" target="_blank"><font color="#ffff99">paladins</font></a><font color="#ffff99">; the one being a magic-user, the other more of a </font><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_arts" target="_blank"><font color="#ffff99">martial artist</font></a><font color="#ffff99">, but both still sharing mutual interests.</font></li><p><font color="#ffffff">Tolkeen gives them a darker edge than D&D but only slightly. Thanks for your comments, I was surprised and intrigued by your responses.</font></p></ul>

[Kaleyen]

I did my first feedback the other day about Rangers in general, and at that time I wasn't following this thread.  I find it funny because I mentioned that if they didn't fine tune us in regards to DPS then to make us more of a utility class and mentioned some of the things that are listed above.Not sure how many of you played a Ranger on EQ1 but we had several spells that were useful in groups as well as useful regens/heals that would be great for solo'ing.  But keep in mind the heals weren't all that powerful, just gave Rangers a lil something extra to bring to the table.<div></div>