Posted by Thoroughly singed someone on July 20, 2000 at 14:51:12:
In Reply to: The type of character you are interested in is apparent here... posted by Dural on July 19, 2000 at 20:49:14:
As much as the Imm flamed me for not reading - neither did you. I like the ranger class. I think it is well balanced. If not so limited, it would be grossly overpowered. And I quote:
Snare, camp, entangle, the staff skills, herb - and the unmentioned: camo, creep, ambush, waylay, serp, bearcharge, backrake(worthless). Vs, oh, say, a warrior:
fourth attack, trip, bash, more weapons, and two sets of specializations - not to mention being useful in all enviroments.
I'd say that's pretty balanced. Wouldn't you? Well, it was MEANT to be pretty balanced when rangers were overhauled, wasn't it? But, uh, why do rangers still have an xp penalty?
About all I missed was wilderness familiarity(significant). Did I trash butcher, bark, armor etc? Yes. Why? Because they're worthless. That 'frill' isn't even going to give you half a leg up on the opposition.