Thinking of Rangers

What if we changed rangers a bit? Currently there are five ranks of beasts that a ranger may call, each represented by a specific animal and each having unique qualities. Unfortunately this also makes the ranger a bit predictable, knowing that its the mammoth for instance that will guard him. I offer the Idea that we should instead change it so that the ranger can call his beasts in an order of his choosing and allow the ranger to choose the beast.

By adding a level modifier to the end of the beast call command a range could keep multiple of similar beasts that vary in power.

So instead of just "beast call mammoth/beast call leopard" a high level ranger could in effect do the following. "Beast call raven 5/ beast call raven 4" Thus giving him one very powerful raven, and one semi powerful raven.

I think it would aid mostly in the role play development of all rangers, but it would also help with the predictability. I do not mean to make it easier for a ranger to call a level 5 beast, only change the type that the beast has to be.

Thoughts?

why not- but, ninjas have to get a mouse.

squeak?

What if we changed rangers a bit? Currently there are five ranks of beasts that a ranger may call, each represented by a specific animal and each having unique qualities. Unfortunately this also makes the ranger a bit predictable, knowing that its the mammoth for instance that will guard him. I offer the Idea that we should instead change it so that the ranger can call his beasts in an order of his choosing and allow the ranger to choose the beast.

By adding a level modifier to the end of the beast call command a range could keep multiple of similar beasts that vary in power.

So instead of just "beast call mammoth/beast call leopard" a high level ranger could in effect do the following. "Beast call raven 5/ beast call raven 4" Thus giving him one very powerful raven, and one semi powerful raven.

I think it would aid mostly in the role play development of all rangers, but it would also help with the predictability. I do not mean to make it easier for a ranger to call a level 5 beast, only change the type that the beast has to be.

Thoughts?

The beastmaster ranger can already call mutliples of one beast, and choose their beast.

The "Mammoth" is only for neutral rangers, evil/good ones have different pets now too.

why not- but' date=' ninjas have to get a mouse.[/quote']

Alright. Just one though.

THE ARMY OF MICE!

revel at my GLORY!

• kinda reminds me of that one creepy white dude who hoarded rats-

anyone else see that movie?

This would add to the level of roleplay? You really think?

Also, as K said, rangers can already call a beast of their choice and they can already have multiple ravens.

I don't understand your idea abour ranks of the beast, what would this change and how would it affect RP (at all), as you claim it would?

Yes rangers can call more than one of a certain animal right now.

But having three ravens for instance, is small damage, and denies the ranger that extra defense.

Yes rangers can already name the beast they wish to call right now.

But the beast is stereotypical, has predefined skills and abilities, which stifle the rangers effectiveness, making it more likely that NO ranger will survive long without a mixture of different pets.

@foxx

Level 1 beast = raven = quick mundane attacks for small damage + Mindlink

Level 2 beast = displacer = medium mundane attacks + Trip

Level 3 beast = Wyvern = Medium magical attacks + Poison

Level 4 beast = Leopard = Strong mundane attacks + Mindlink

Level 5 beast = Mammoth = Massive Mundane attacks + Defense

Before anyone says thats just neutrals, DUH! Place Goodie or Evil substitutes in as you please. The fact remains if you want a certain skill, you have to have a certain beast. I think we would see a greater combination of beasts being utilized by rangers if the ranger can select the power level and thereby skills of the beast that they call.

As for how it helps role play. I find it ridiculous that every halfling ranger tames a mammoth. Or that every Feral with a doglike description is walking around with a Leopard. With a change like this, a ranger could choose to be the "Master of Birds" or the "Keeper of Wyverns". Thereby increasing the RP.

Edit> Picture this;

Foxx is standing here. {Beastmaster example}

(Charmed) A Massive Raven is here guarding its master. {level 5, can defend and strikes much harder than a normal raven)

(Charmed) A very large Raven is here guarding its master. {level 4, strong attacks and can be used to prowl}

(Charmed) A large Raven is here guarding its master {level 3, magical attacks and can poison}

Or

Kyzarius is standing here.

(Charmed) A Massive Mammoth is here guarding its master. {level 5}

(Charmed) A small mammoth is here guarding its master. {level 4}

(Charmed) A baby mammoth is here guarding its master. {level 3}

I really don't think Croyvern's idea is that hard to understand... Think about it.

+1 for this idea. Nice.

deff, it makes me want to play a ranger lol

Edit> Picture this;

Foxx is standing here. {Beastmaster example}

(Charmed) A Massive Raven is here guarding its master. {level 5, can defend and strikes much harder than a normal raven)

(Charmed) A very large Raven is here guarding its master. {level 4, strong attacks and can be used to prowl}

(Charmed) A large Raven is here guarding its master {level 3, magical attacks and can poison}

Sooo... you simply rename all the beasts as a raven?

i.e. a massive raven = mammoth

very large raven = leopard

large raven = wyvern?

Just seems to me as a way to hide what creature does what for your group.

a raven jumping in front of you? a mammoth attacking like a leopard?

Why not just let the ranger restring what their pets are called, we can have Ocelot's and badgers!

Just seems to me as a way to hide what creature does what for your group.

a raven jumping in front of you? a mammoth attacking like a leopard?

Why not just let the ranger restring what their pets are called, we can have Ocelot's and badgers!

Now that's a much better idea which can improve RP.

I love that idea...

From a PK perspective, not knowing what pets a ranger is bringing into battle can alter tactics in numerous ways - right now you know what the pets can do, but if they've got a raven that acts like a mammoth you can't tell until combat begins, and even then you'll have to be paying very close attention to specific lines of line-intensive combat (ranger + pets + opponent = lots of stuff happening on screen each round). What pets the ranger has can matter a lot... do you need to be flying, will mana shield stop the damage from one of the pets, should you expect a percentage of melee attacks to be mammoth-soaked and otherwise compensated for, etc.

Also, unless this uber-raven is easily distinguished from the weaker ones, the tactic of killing off specific pets loses some utility - though I've never found it to be a very useful one for actually killing the ranger herself anyways, so I care very little about this.

However, from an RP perspective, I think it's a great concept and opens up a lot of ranger-specific RP angles. However, one should not overlook the impact these kinds of apparently cosmetic changes can have on PK.

However' date=' one should not overlook the impact these kinds of apparently cosmetic changes can have on PK.[/quote']

Just as I was thinking.

From a PK perspective' date=' not knowing what pets a ranger is bringing into battle can alter tactics in numerous ways - right now you know what the pets can do, but if they've got a raven that acts like a mammoth you can't tell until combat begins, and even then you'll have to be paying very close attention to specific lines of line-intensive combat (ranger + pets + opponent = lots of stuff happening on screen each round). [/quote']

Exactly why I brought this up. Why should EVERY class know what the ranger is brining to the fight?

Sooo... you simply rename all the beasts as a raven?

i.e. a massive raven = mammoth

very large raven = leopard

large raven = wyvern?

I believe that we would have to use the same basic descriptive words for creatures (Massive/Large/ect.) so that such a change does not give an unfair advantage to the ranger. Thus maintaining the balance that they already have.

Why not just let the ranger restring what their pets are called, we can have Ocelot's and badgers!

This was my first thought as well, but I figured it would be far more intensive for the staff to implement. But it would have the same desired effect. So I would be all for it.

However' date=' one should not overlook the impact these kinds of apparently cosmetic changes can have on PK.[/quote']

I for one would like to see people have to slow down and consider each fight. The current way people approach battles frustrates me, as players we use our knowledge of the game and other classes to win, where our characters should have little or no knowledge of our enemies skills on first contact. For instance, with Tyberidis (Healer) when I fought the Nexus, I never prepared for the Nexus Skill they used against me. Why? Because for me to prepare for it, I would have to know it existed, and that knowledge could only come from the player, not the character.

Thank you all for your comments.

Exactly why I brought this up. Why should EVERY class know what the ranger is brining to the fight?

Balance? You already can't tell from range the difference between an archer and a tracker... and frankly, rangers are among the last classes that need anything to make them stronger, even only a tiny bit stronger, in my opinion.

I for one would like to see people have to slow down and consider each fight. The current way people approach battles frustrates me, as players we use our knowledge of the game and other classes to win, where our characters should have little or no knowledge of our enemies skills on first contact. For instance, with Tyberidis (Healer) when I fought the Nexus, I never prepared for the Nexus Skill they used against me. Why? Because for me to prepare for it, I would have to know it existed, and that knowledge could only come from the player, not the character.

While I've always sympathized with this kind of reasoning, I've never found it convincing. There's a ton of stuff in life that I've never personally experienced and yet know a great deal about, either through reading about it or being told about it. While there may be specific RP angles that support a character literally knowing nothing about the world they are in, most of the time you are RPing a character that has spent a long time in Aabahran before you started playing her. It makes perfect sense to me for a character to have a good deal of knowledge of the world when you start playing it.

While I've always sympathized with this kind of reasoning' date=' I've never found it convincing. There's a ton of stuff in life that I've never personally experienced and yet know a great deal about, either through reading about it or being told about it. While there may be specific RP angles that support a character literally knowing nothing about the world they are in, most of the time you are RPing a character that has spent a long time in Aabahran before you started playing her. It makes perfect sense to me for a character to have a good deal of knowledge of the world when you start playing it.[/quote']

I completely agree here. If you wish to become better as both a player, and a character, allowing these small RP angles to define whether or not you die is totally pointless. I mean, you can still successfully play a 'stupid' character and keep all PK knowledge and game knowledge to yourself, but when it comes to fighting for your life, you should never let the small RP splice of that ruin whether or not you have a chance.

Ever.