test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Split Hunter Ranger into two classes
H/R started out with three types which could each be played as pure archer by simply ignoring the ranger element. I leveled three H/Rs to 60 to make one of each of the three types then available. I don't like ranger, it's just not my thing but unfortunately two of the three choices have been effectively destroyed for me.
To my mind switching between an archer and a ranger makes about as much sense as switching between wizard and rogue modes.
Why not just split H/R into two distinct classes, Hunter and Ranger? I might actually play some of each if that were the case. It's the switching business that drives me crazy. No thank you. Wondering if others see benefit from splitting out H/R into two classes as well.
To my mind switching between an archer and a ranger makes about as much sense as switching between wizard and rogue modes.
Why not just split H/R into two distinct classes, Hunter and Ranger? I might actually play some of each if that were the case. It's the switching business that drives me crazy. No thank you. Wondering if others see benefit from splitting out H/R into two classes as well.
Post edited by gphxgphx on
0
Comments
Fast forward to NW:
From its introduction, HR was intended to utilise both aspects of the ranger. In fact, all the trees involved some degree of stance switching, with many players running hybrid builds. There were, however, many complaints from players wanting to specialize more in one stance or another and so, in mod 4, the new paths were unveiled - a more streamlined archer, more streamlined melee, and a more streamlined switcher. Now, I used to be an archer, but now I play trapper and I very much enjoy it. I love having the capacity to take shots from range, close in and deal melee damage, and hop back out to range again.
So, in the kindest way possible, I have to say that splitting HR into two classes is short-sighted, focusing on two polar aspects of the class without giving consideration to how they're intended to mesh with each other.
Sharra Del'Armgo - SW Trapper Hybrid HR
Ogghra Bar'Ghuzumn - MI Scoundrel TR
Vænna Thrymskjöldr - IV Protector GF
If you don't like switching play either Archer or Combat. Simple as. I really think WoW missed a beat by not giving Hunter the choice of playing melee, they thought about it initially but decided against it. Stupid mechanics like Wing Clip remained for a very long time before they finally got rid of the whole melee Hunter idea. I would have played melee in a heartbeat though. What I liked most about the Hunter, besides being able to tame all those kewl pets, was that I could use all my abilities on the move. NW is very static in that respect, not just HR but every class. But back on topic I am against the suggestion of splitting the HR.
The most important thing in life is to be yourself. Unless you can be Batman. Always be Batman.
Precisely. Many in this game don't seem to understand how satisfying a true hunter/pet dynamic can be. One of my intentions was to explore the original buffing/healing hunter build along beastmaster lines to improve viability of the pet for solo and perhaps even group play. Another of the archer builds for pvp, and one for pve. Now all three of my archers are stuck in a nearly identical pve build. Two of those options (as a pure archer) were effectively eliminated as they were.
Those who like ranger say they like having choices as well but if H/R were split into two classes there would be SIX choices instead of three.
Not to mention the 10-15% of us left handers for whom Tabbing means taking our hands of off the mouse, hitting Tab, then putting our hands back on the mouse. For those who play mouse and arrow keys due to handedness there are limited keys to remap things to. For similar reasons many left handers ignore Stealth on the rogue too. Splitting H/R into two classes would remove the introduction of a crippling disability for a large percentage of players.
For those who like to play pure hunter or ranger exclusively half of their trees are essentially wasted. Splitting them into two classes would give players literally twice as many choices. Or at the very least get rid of the awkward Tab mechanic and simply allow players to use skills whenever they want to without switching modes. At least that way some of the players wouldn't be playing with a hand effectively tied behind their back.
We lost all buff bonuses as 3rd path. Eg no unique party utility.
We got only weak representation of what HR could be with trapper. We were pushed into Archer or Combat. And even thought I do prefer combat I loved tab mechanic we had in mod 2 and 3. I m periodically trying to play trapper. But it still feel like weak Archer with some rare combat incoming. Also weaker then pure combat HR.
Will play on preview to see new trapper but current changes don't make me feel it will be better in anyway. Trapper has some utility as control but this merely enough to survive in single but in DD "CW can do better in any way" (c). Yet in mod 5 - TR will have better single target, DC will be also better. So class is meah useful.
I did liked original D&D 3.5 hunter ranger as like in Neverwinter Nights 2. Where you could select bow or duals. And dive into it. Yes it did not have both available as Neverwinter online had originally as far as i remember. But it was way better in how it was implemented and how it worked. Class had huge team usability yet played unique role. And companion was really great too.
Ranger/Pet dynamics in D&D don't quite work as in WoW. Unless you're a specific alternate/paragon path, there's not much you can actually do in combat with your animal companion. Wizards can deliver spells via their companion, but that's because it's a familiar. Animal companions have to be trained in certain "tricks" to even be able to perform basic functions like flank or sneak in combat, sacrificing other ranger feat options. Yes, beastmaster exists, but the whole pet gameplay functions completely different (kinda similar to the current companion system, actually, with it functioning like SW's soul puppet at best).
Also, note that most of these animal companion-type rangers only arose from 3.0 onwards.
Sharra Del'Armgo - SW Trapper Hybrid HR
Ogghra Bar'Ghuzumn - MI Scoundrel TR
Vænna Thrymskjöldr - IV Protector GF
All in all, the hybrid nature of the HR is its most awesome aspect (IMO). It allows for fast gameplay and nice combos that are a thing of the past for other classes.
I don't really wanna have the HR a "do rotation, spam at will" class like my CW is. I like it the way it is, is more active and engaging.
Born of Black Wind: SW Level 80
Agreed. Possibly even bring back a vestige of nature path...?
Sharra Del'Armgo - SW Trapper Hybrid HR
Ogghra Bar'Ghuzumn - MI Scoundrel TR
Vænna Thrymskjöldr - IV Protector GF
They're better controllers too. Logic.
Something like: Trapper - Fleet Stance 5/5, Deft Strikes 5/5, Swiftness of the Fox 5/5 and then for Combat - Blood Letting 5/5, Fluid Hunter 5/5, Wilds Medicine 5/5, Piercing Blade 1/5.
The most important thing in life is to be yourself. Unless you can be Batman. Always be Batman.
And we need a few powers reworked from the nature tree.
Trapper control is now pretty good. Roots and constant access to Disruptive make a really good job. I´ve been running eSoT many times today and a Trapper can pretty much lock down most of the non CC-Immune creatures in every encounter, making runs much easier for the whole group. There´s still some work to do but the spot is pretty good.
Born of Black Wind: SW Level 80
Sharra Del'Armgo - SW Trapper Hybrid HR
Ogghra Bar'Ghuzumn - MI Scoundrel TR
Vænna Thrymskjöldr - IV Protector GF