Enemy master strikes

[tl1000]

<div>Was just wondering seeing as the spotlight seems to be on us Rangers this month if there was any chance that enemy master strikes could be put as a bow ca instead of [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] melee, just a thought......</div>

[macte]

This is one of those things that I've wondered about many times.  I know they were made as they are because we are scouts, predators, blah blah.  Since LU19, rangers are even further removed from our scout brethren.  I would be perfectly happy if all melee stealth and positional attacks just dissappeared, don't seem to fit much with the overall view of the class.  I am the master of the bow that every so often hides in the shadows and backstabs you, then runs back out to use my bow?<div></div>

[The_Wind]

People tend to talk of their "view" of the class in such strange notions.  Like the Assassins are meant to be the masters of melee, while the rangers are meant to be the masters of the bow.  I find this very very strange.  Assassins, as the name is, is a person who assassinates.  Most assassinations in olden days we seem to see stealthily hidden individuals, cloaked in darkness, with a poison tipped dagger stabbing them in the back.  Many assassins also favored the bow, or the crossbow as it were, and used poison tipped arrows, or darts.  In that sense, you'll notice that even assassins have a couple of ranged CA's themselves.  Due to their more intimate nature of wanting to make sure their target is dead, they tend to get closer. Now take the rangers.  Ranger is a man who survives, usually on his own, in the wilds, where few men venture.  A person who is strong of will, body, and mind and can live off the land, using all resources as he can.  One who knows the lay out of the land, and where to find the better hunting grounds.  One who uses his bow, not usually so much to kill, but to hunt, or scare away would be aggressors.  One, who when necessary would get into the fray with a sword in hand, or dagger, to defend himself, or others.  That being said, the Ranger tends to use his bow more, as its an easier way to survive in the wild for them.  But they are not unskilled up close due to the fact often times, its necessary. I guess, what i'm trying to get across here, is WHY, in anyones right mind, would you want MORE of your melee CA's taken away at this point in time to be replaced by a bow CA, which, under current circumstances, you wouldn't be able to use while moving.  Making yourself even more useless upclose against certain foes, which ranges have shown to have a certain affinitive hatred for.  Certain things I could understand, like being able to finish a HO at ranged, but wanting to turn more of your melee CA's in to ranged CA's just does not seem like very a very good idea.  These are two classes based off, not their basic fighting styles, but their basic skills in their chose profession.  If all my skills were ranged, I wouldn't be a ranger, i'd be an archer. <div></div>

[macte]

I was definitely not advocating that our melee stealth and positional attacks be turned into ranged attacks...I would much rather they were moved to less powerful non-backstab type uses.  I am afraid i can't think of a single ranger from literature (not saying I have read every book in existence and memorized it, so don't start with the exceptions that prove the rule please)  that "backstabbed".  Bows of course always a big part of the equation, and of course you can look at Aragorn, Drizzt or a favorite of mine - Elbryan , etc to see the ranger ability for melee.  Also, Dungeons and Dragons rangers got free dual wield at many points in that rulesets history.There are some abilities that rangers and assassins should and must share, stealth and tracking for instance, but I think it was a mistake for them to be made sister classes in the first place.I just think that the stealth and positional melee attacks are more of a holdover from the predators days then they are part of the design vision of the class itself.<div></div>