everything in DDO was imported from D&D as well.
I don't expect everything in NW to be the same as DDO but they should at least have the base classes in the game.
I always play archers its my play style I hate melee.
everything in DDO was imported from D&D as well.
I don't expect everything in NW to be the same as DDO but they should at least have the base classes in the game.
I always play archers its my play style I hate melee.
Different edition, my friend. Also a different 'module'.
3.5e (DDO) vs 4.0 (NWO)
Eberron (DDO) vs FR (NWO)
So you are comparing oranges to tangerines. Similar, yet a different experience.
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited January 2013
Rangers are not archers. They can be and often are but they are not *the* ranged class.
In D&D fighters and thieves are often just as viable to be a ranged class.
That being said they have not confirmed the Ranger Class or the ability to use bows yet. But There's a good chance that will be added by launch if it is not ready yet.
I'll eat my Helm of Balduran if Ranger is not in the game. Same with paladin. They'll come, just wait.
I'd honestly be surprised if we got Paladins at launch. That'd make the class choices extremely "heavy armor" heavy, which could create problems when running dungeons.
0
xearrikMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, SilverstarsPosts: 323Arc User
Rangers are not archers. They can be and often are but they are not *the* ranged class.
In D&D fighters and thieves are often just as viable to be a ranged class.
That being said they have not confirmed the Ranger Class or the ability to use bows yet. But There's a good chance that will be added by launch if it is not ready yet.
All the free bow feats makes me feel rp wise, that part of being a ranger mean you must know how to use a bow.
Da kitties don't speak for me, deez kitties speak fur us all!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I'll Keep this up till beta goes live. I'll improve it soon.
0
quorforgedMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
All the free bow feats makes me feel rp wise, that part of being a ranger mean you must know how to use a bow.
Free bow feats is actually unique to DDO. In 3.5, you have to choose between TWF and bow feats. In 4E, you choose between archer, TWF, and beastmaster features.
0
malagarrMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited January 2013
I've never played 4E, but having played D&D for almost thirty years now I can tell you that rangers have changed a great deal. There was a time when they could wear full plate and cast magic-user spells. In 2E they started making the transition to a "Drizzt" model for rangers and by 3E they came to the realization that a lot of people wanted to customize their rangers and not play Drizzt clones. In most versions, though, a fighter who was designed as an archer was a better archer than a ranger was.
As for DDO...Eberron was horrid. I couldn't really get into that game. =/
I am, however, very interested in checking out Neverwinter. I don't like the 4E rule set, but I will readily admit that it converts over to a MMO/CRPG format much easier than the previous editions did.
0
xearrikMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, SilverstarsPosts: 323Arc User
Free bow feats is actually unique to DDO. In 3.5, you have to choose between TWF and bow feats. In 4E, you choose between archer, TWF, and beastmaster features.
I know this. I was speaking of specialization. At level 2 you choose, then at 6, and 11 you get additional free feats. Because of these extra feats and lore it just seems to me to easy to be able to do both. Yea you won't be insane at either. But it feels wrong to have a ranger without some bow skill.
Da kitties don't speak for me, deez kitties speak fur us all!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I'll Keep this up till beta goes live. I'll improve it soon.
0
quorforgedMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
I know this. I was speaking of specialization. At level 2 you choose, then at 6, and 11 you get additional free feats. Because of these extra feats and lore it just seems to me to easy to be able to do both. Yea you won't be insane at either. But it feels wrong to have a ranger without some bow skill.
That's actually not how it works in 3.5. You choose one specialty, and get the feats for that specialty as you level-up, automatically. Your free feats cannot be mixed between archery and TWF. 4E is similar in that you choose one specialty at level one, and then the benefits you gain (a bonus feat, and bonus effects from powers) from then on are set; you can't mix-and-match.
RP whatever you want, of course, but the mechanics do not encourage being an archer as a Ranger any more than they do being a TWF meleer. Obviously, anyone with proficiency with a bow should carry one, or at least some other ranged weapon, but that's true of Fighters, Rogues, and Paladins, not just Rangers.
...
That being said they have not confirmed the Ranger Class or the ability to use bows yet. But There's a good chance that will be added by launch if it is not ready yet.
Do you remember when we were arguing about which class should be more iconic and in, me supporting archer ranger you supporting melee, a dev chimed in to say that "ranger in the works" was not archer but melee?
That killed all my excitement for class.
0
xearrikMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, SilverstarsPosts: 323Arc User
That's actually not how it works in 3.5. You choose one specialty, and get the feats for that specialty as you level-up, automatically. Your free feats cannot be mixed between archery and TWF. 4E is similar in that you choose one specialty at level one, and then the benefits you gain (a bonus feat, and bonus effects from powers) from then on are set; you can't mix-and-match.
RP whatever you want, of course, but the mechanics do not encourage being an archer as a Ranger any more than they do being a TWF meleer. Obviously, anyone with proficiency with a bow should carry one, or at least some other ranged weapon, but that's true of Fighters, Rogues, and Paladins, not just Rangers.
You said what I just said... I'm not wrong you just didn't understand what I said.
At level 2 you choose, then at 6, and 11 you get additional free feats.
See the lack of the word choose again. Just because you have free ranged or twf feats doesn't mean that ranger or twf are locked away from you. You can still splash in those feats. You just get one type for free now.
Da kitties don't speak for me, deez kitties speak fur us all!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I'll Keep this up till beta goes live. I'll improve it soon.
0
quorforgedMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
See the lack of the word choose again. Just because you have free ranged or twf feats doesn't mean that ranger or twf are locked away from you. You can still splash in those feats. You just get one type for free now.
Then I don't understand what point you're trying to make.
You can take ranged combat feats on a Paladin. That doesn't mean that a Paladin is somehow inherently an archer (in any capacity beyond simply being proficient with bows).
If you take the TWF specialty on a Ranger, you get nothing from your class that makes you a better archer in comparison to other fighting styles. There's no more reason to take bow feats than there is with any other full-BAB class.
0
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited January 2013
All the free melee feats make me feel like Ranger is a melee class...and I have always played them as a melee class. Of course any good adventurer has a bow but my primary weapons on every ranger I played was melee based weapons.
My point is, and always will be, that the ranger is not a *ranged* class. It can be but it's not forced and the TWF is equally viable.
Which is better is an argument which will never end because it's apples to oranges but as a die-hard melee ranger lover I refuse to let the ranged misconception slide
I'm mean like that sometimes. Hehe.
And I don't remember Crypticmaplois confirming the ranger class in that post? I'm going to have to rehunt that post down.
All the free melee feats make me feel like Ranger is a melee class...and I have always played them as a melee class. Of course any good adventurer has a bow but my primary weapons on every ranger I played was melee based weapons.
My point is, and always will be, that the ranger is not a *ranged* class. It can be but it's not forced and the TWF is equally viable.
Which is better is an argument which will never end because it's apples to oranges but as a die-hard melee ranger lover I refuse to let the ranged misconception slide
I'm mean like that sometimes. Hehe.
And I don't remember Crypticmaplois confirming the ranger class in that post? I'm going to have to rehunt that post down.
I'm just the opposite of you, I hate melee fighting I live to be at a distance when I fight. I love to slow the enemies movement and kite them in circles til they die. Many times in DDO I've soloed bosses and things with no ranged attack by doing this and won. I always loved distance fighting but hate casting bars which is why I love archers and not casters.
Oh Atari how I miss you!
0
iamtruthseekerMember, Moonstars, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
I'm just the opposite of you, I hate melee fighting I live to be at a distance when I fight. I love to slow the enemies movement and kite them in circles til they die. Many times in DDO I've soloed bosses and things with no ranged attack by doing this and won. I always loved distance fighting but hate casting bars which is why I love archers and not casters.
That's perfectly fine. I prefer melee (as far as the Ranger Class goes) and I'm fine with that.
I'm not fine with saying because "ranger" became the MMO term for "archer" that the Ranger Class is an Archer.
It can be. Often is. Doesn't have to be.
Every time somebody says it a Drizzt Wannabe dies. *claps and chants 'I do believe in Drizzt, I do believe in Drizzt'*
I'd honestly be surprised if we got Paladins at launch. That'd make the class choices extremely "heavy armor" heavy, which could create problems when running dungeons.
What are you confused? Problems with heavy armor lol! That is NOT the reason if Paladin is not available at release. Each class is lots of work for developers so that might be a reason Paladins maybe are not available at release.
It is true Paladins get automatic profiency with Plate Armor. That said Fighters has many feats. A high level Guardian Fighter who is supposed to be a TANK in this game certainly has Plate Armor!
Now classes I wish to be released in no particular order: Ranger, Druid and Paladin. I also want to play Cleric but I got impression devoted Cleric at least will be available.
Problems with heavy armor??? This game is much more close to WOW trinity then Guild Wars 2(I don't like Guild Wars 2 with no tanks where everybody can ressurect each other and it is repeated resurect process) combat. That said this is Action combat so a TANK needs to dodge/move etc. and Wizards need to aim. In its own way I believe Neverwinter will have great combat.
Ranger not meant to be archer? the name Ranger itself has RANGE in it.
my question is why have a Thief and melee ranger basically the same thing.
if they have anything better than a thief they would just be a warrior in lesser armor.
Rangers are the only class that does physical ranged damage with skills.
Take that away and its just another melee class that's not needed the idea of multiple classes is to cover every play style to satisfy as many players as you can. It serves no purpose to make them all exactly the same.
Oh Atari how I miss you!
0
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited January 2013
Home, home on the range. Where the deer and the antelopes play...
The orgins of Ranger stem from the english term which essencially meant wilderness. Here's some information from Dictionary.com:
Range
11. ( US ), ( Canadian )
a. an extensive tract of open land on which livestock can graze
b. ( as modifier ): range cattle
12. the geographical region in which a species of plant or animal normally grows or lives
13. a rank, row, or series of items
14. a series or chain of mountains
Ranger
1. forest ranger.
2. one of a body of armed guards who patrol a region.
3. ( initial capital letter ) a U.S. soldier in World War II specially trained for making surprise raids and attacks in small groups. Compare commando ( def 1 ) .
4. a soldier specially trained in the techniques of guerrilla warfare, especially in jungle terrain.
5. a person who ranges or roves.
So out of that definition we got the term ranger which is essentially a protector of the forest/forest law enforcement. The term also is used to describe specialized light infantry troops in the military noted for being in remote locations.
That is the basis of the term Ranger. Ranger (archer) is a modern day term coined only by MMO's. The term "ranger" in the MMO sense, in case you haven't noticed, is not in the dictionary.
D&D has been around before computers were better than my watch. The term "ranger" in the MMO sense had absolutely no meaning the TSR...to anybody...until MMO's came around. The term Archer was even used when describing Baldur's Gate "rangers" in the late 90's on fansites.
Devoted Cleric has been confirmed even though it hasn't seen much press/spotlight.
She is looking at you right now, scroll up to the top. See that girl in lipstick? She is devoted cleric (and she holds a mirror - must be cleric of Sune)
Home, home on the range. Where the deer and the antelopes play...
The orgins of Ranger stem from the english term which essencially meant wilderness. Here's some information from Dictionary.com:
So out of that definition we got the term ranger which is essentially a protector of the forest/forest law enforcement. The term also is used to describe specialized light infantry troops in the military noted for being in remote locations.
That is the basis of the term Ranger. Ranger (archer) is a modern day term coined only by MMO's. The term "ranger" in the MMO sense, in case you haven't noticed, is not in the dictionary.
D&D has been around before computers were better than my watch. The term "ranger" in the MMO sense had absolutely no meaning the TSR...to anybody...until MMO's came around. The term Archer was even used when describing Baldur's Gate "rangers" in the late 90's on fansites.
both those Range definitions are NOUNS... try the verbs. as in actions... range in actions means distant.
you can take warrior and say its a being that wages war or a soldier that fights for an army meaning that you can't do anything individual. Thieves by definition are people that steal things most avoiding fights and conflicts... meaning they have no combat skills they just steal things.
If you want to break down each of the classes I'd be happy to go on... if you want to stick to realistic meanings I could have the whole class list in a dress cooking in a kitchen. when someone says we need a range class... they mean distance not a roaming warrior. archer specificly defines using a bow to fight alone, rangers can use many weapons but specialize in weapons that support the roaming warrior which resides in the mountains which would mean they need a weapon that can hurt from the top of the mountain things that are at the bottom of the mountain... doubt they make swords that long or mountains that short.
Comments
He no play PnP I take it.
Haha, neither have I, but I am at least somewhat familiar with D&D!
DDO is based off of D&D, a real life RPG!
So DDO is NOT the source material.
D&D is.
D&D has rangers. We hear that there will be rangers in NW.
So yes... yes, there will be rangers... just not now... and not ported from DDO....
I don't expect everything in NW to be the same as DDO but they should at least have the base classes in the game.
I always play archers its my play style I hate melee.
Different edition, my friend. Also a different 'module'.
3.5e (DDO) vs 4.0 (NWO)
Eberron (DDO) vs FR (NWO)
So you are comparing oranges to tangerines. Similar, yet a different experience.
In D&D fighters and thieves are often just as viable to be a ranged class.
That being said they have not confirmed the Ranger Class or the ability to use bows yet. But There's a good chance that will be added by launch if it is not ready yet.
I try to pretend that Artificers (and Warforged) don't exist. A bit too steam punky for my high fantasy tastes.
While it could be true for 'forged, Artificer is just a great class imho. And with a little fluff change it can be easily adapted to FR.
St. Augustinus
I'd honestly be surprised if we got Paladins at launch. That'd make the class choices extremely "heavy armor" heavy, which could create problems when running dungeons.
All the free bow feats makes me feel rp wise, that part of being a ranger mean you must know how to use a bow.
Free bow feats is actually unique to DDO. In 3.5, you have to choose between TWF and bow feats. In 4E, you choose between archer, TWF, and beastmaster features.
As for DDO...Eberron was horrid. I couldn't really get into that game. =/
I am, however, very interested in checking out Neverwinter. I don't like the 4E rule set, but I will readily admit that it converts over to a MMO/CRPG format much easier than the previous editions did.
I know this. I was speaking of specialization. At level 2 you choose, then at 6, and 11 you get additional free feats. Because of these extra feats and lore it just seems to me to easy to be able to do both. Yea you won't be insane at either. But it feels wrong to have a ranger without some bow skill.
That's actually not how it works in 3.5. You choose one specialty, and get the feats for that specialty as you level-up, automatically. Your free feats cannot be mixed between archery and TWF. 4E is similar in that you choose one specialty at level one, and then the benefits you gain (a bonus feat, and bonus effects from powers) from then on are set; you can't mix-and-match.
RP whatever you want, of course, but the mechanics do not encourage being an archer as a Ranger any more than they do being a TWF meleer. Obviously, anyone with proficiency with a bow should carry one, or at least some other ranged weapon, but that's true of Fighters, Rogues, and Paladins, not just Rangers.
Do you remember when we were arguing about which class should be more iconic and in, me supporting archer ranger you supporting melee, a dev chimed in to say that "ranger in the works" was not archer but melee?
That killed all my excitement for class.
You said what I just said... I'm not wrong you just didn't understand what I said.
See the lack of the word choose again. Just because you have free ranged or twf feats doesn't mean that ranger or twf are locked away from you. You can still splash in those feats. You just get one type for free now.
Then I don't understand what point you're trying to make.
You can take ranged combat feats on a Paladin. That doesn't mean that a Paladin is somehow inherently an archer (in any capacity beyond simply being proficient with bows).
If you take the TWF specialty on a Ranger, you get nothing from your class that makes you a better archer in comparison to other fighting styles. There's no more reason to take bow feats than there is with any other full-BAB class.
My point is, and always will be, that the ranger is not a *ranged* class. It can be but it's not forced and the TWF is equally viable.
Which is better is an argument which will never end because it's apples to oranges but as a die-hard melee ranger lover I refuse to let the ranged misconception slide
I'm mean like that sometimes. Hehe.
And I don't remember Crypticmaplois confirming the ranger class in that post? I'm going to have to rehunt that post down.
I'm just the opposite of you, I hate melee fighting I live to be at a distance when I fight. I love to slow the enemies movement and kite them in circles til they die. Many times in DDO I've soloed bosses and things with no ranged attack by doing this and won. I always loved distance fighting but hate casting bars which is why I love archers and not casters.
Nuff said.
Point? I have to have a POINT now?!
Please do - though I am not sure if it was crypticmapolis (maybe h2oratty or jfinderdev)
Or maybe you can PM and ask them to reconfirm it?
They specifically said that "ranger in the works" is not archer ranger but melee ranger.
That's perfectly fine. I prefer melee (as far as the Ranger Class goes) and I'm fine with that.
I'm not fine with saying because "ranger" became the MMO term for "archer" that the Ranger Class is an Archer.
It can be. Often is. Doesn't have to be.
Every time somebody says it a Drizzt Wannabe dies.
*claps and chants 'I do believe in Drizzt, I do believe in Drizzt'*
It is true Paladins get automatic profiency with Plate Armor. That said Fighters has many feats. A high level Guardian Fighter who is supposed to be a TANK in this game certainly has Plate Armor!
Now classes I wish to be released in no particular order: Ranger, Druid and Paladin. I also want to play Cleric but I got impression devoted Cleric at least will be available.
Problems with heavy armor??? This game is much more close to WOW trinity then Guild Wars 2(I don't like Guild Wars 2 with no tanks where everybody can ressurect each other and it is repeated resurect process) combat. That said this is Action combat so a TANK needs to dodge/move etc. and Wizards need to aim. In its own way I believe Neverwinter will have great combat.
No wonder the latest DDO expansion had a "portal" to Forgotten Realms :P
Devoted Cleric has been confirmed even though it hasn't seen much press/spotlight.
my question is why have a Thief and melee ranger basically the same thing.
if they have anything better than a thief they would just be a warrior in lesser armor.
Rangers are the only class that does physical ranged damage with skills.
Take that away and its just another melee class that's not needed the idea of multiple classes is to cover every play style to satisfy as many players as you can. It serves no purpose to make them all exactly the same.
The orgins of Ranger stem from the english term which essencially meant wilderness. Here's some information from Dictionary.com:
So out of that definition we got the term ranger which is essentially a protector of the forest/forest law enforcement. The term also is used to describe specialized light infantry troops in the military noted for being in remote locations.
That is the basis of the term Ranger. Ranger (archer) is a modern day term coined only by MMO's. The term "ranger" in the MMO sense, in case you haven't noticed, is not in the dictionary.
D&D has been around before computers were better than my watch. The term "ranger" in the MMO sense had absolutely no meaning the TSR...to anybody...until MMO's came around. The term Archer was even used when describing Baldur's Gate "rangers" in the late 90's on fansites.
She is looking at you right now, scroll up to the top. See that girl in lipstick? She is devoted cleric (and she holds a mirror - must be cleric of Sune)
both those Range definitions are NOUNS... try the verbs. as in actions... range in actions means distant.
you can take warrior and say its a being that wages war or a soldier that fights for an army meaning that you can't do anything individual. Thieves by definition are people that steal things most avoiding fights and conflicts... meaning they have no combat skills they just steal things.
If you want to break down each of the classes I'd be happy to go on... if you want to stick to realistic meanings I could have the whole class list in a dress cooking in a kitchen. when someone says we need a range class... they mean distance not a roaming warrior. archer specificly defines using a bow to fight alone, rangers can use many weapons but specialize in weapons that support the roaming warrior which resides in the mountains which would mean they need a weapon that can hurt from the top of the mountain things that are at the bottom of the mountain... doubt they make swords that long or mountains that short.