The ranger class has been updated and revised from the First Edition to the Second Edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons rules. Perhaps the most important change and controversy is in the rules regarding the "giant class" bonuses for rangers.

In the First Edition rules (FER), "when fighting humanoid-type creatures of the 'giant class'... rangers add one hit point for each level of experience they have attained to the points of damage scored when they hit in melee combat. Giant class creatures are ...(we know the list)." In the Second Edition rules (SER), rangers "...focus their efforts against some particular creature, usually one that marauds their homeland.... Every ranger must select a special enemy..,. Thereafter whenever the ranger encounters that enemy he gains a +4 bonus to his attack rolls."

It is both our opinions that one of the major problems with the FER on rangers was the broad scope of the "giant class" creatures and the powers the ranger had against them. Together, we've given our opinions about the new SER ranger and the motivating reasons for the bonuses versus species enemies. O Comments From Ranger Rick -- By Lord Rick Emerich

Since the ranger class was revised under the SER to include a "species enemy" instead of the all encompassing bonus against "giant class" creatures under the FER, it was necessary for me as a DM to come up with classifications for species enemies. After some thought, I decided that it there were some species, such as orc, goblin, troll, type of dragon, etc., that acted alike, had similar characteristics and habitats. So instead of making a ranger choose just one specific species, I made available to my players a list of "species enemies" that were in fact creatures grouped together by common habitat, heritage, and/or intentions. I addressed only the more common varieties that would be encountered by an average ranger.

Ranger Rick's Species Enemies

1. GOBLIN GROUP: Goblins, hobgoblins, orcs, kobolds, gnolls, flinds, half­orcs .
2. GIANT GROUP: All giant types, titans
3. SWAMP GROUP: Trolls, ogres, ettins, lizardmen, troglodytes
4. DRAGON GROUP: All dragon types
5. UNDEAD GROUP -- COMMON: Zombies (including ju-ju), skeletons, ghouls, ghasts, shadows
6. UNDEAD GROUP -- UNCOMMON: Wights, wraiths, mummies, spectres, vampires, ghosts, and undead above 6HD
7. DEMON GROUP: All demons
8. DEVIL GROUP: All devils
9. DAEMON GROUP: All daemons
10. WERECREATURES: Lycanthropes and shapechangers
11. INSECT GROUP: Giant versions of spiders and insects, including carrion crawlers, phase spiders, yuan ti, and thri-keen

In the FER the ranger class was more powerful than the other fighter-types, having 2d8 of hit dice at first level; as long as a fighter-type of PC had the ability scores required to become a ranger, there was little incentive for him to become a regular fighter. The most commonly encountered evil creatures in low- or mid-level games always involve at least several encounters with the "giant class" creatures, and in tandem with his better hit points and woodland lore, the ranger was thus superior. At higher levels the ranger obtained druidic and magic-user spells, and did devastating damage against the giant creatures, adding one hit point of damage for every level of experience the ranger had.

There were some other problems with the FER ranger. Tracking was based on a percentage of success which was the same for all rangers, whether they were 1st- or 12th-level! Hardly fair, since with experience tracking chances should logically increase. Further, the delineation of their other ranger-related skills was not very thorough.

It was these disparities that made the ranger class the way to go in the FER if you wanted a fighter-type. Well, true, paladins had some good special powers, but who wants the restriction of always playing a lawful good PC to get the laying on of hands, detect evil, etc.? Rangers could be any variety of good: neutral, chaotic or lawful.

Thus it was agreed by all, even the most fervent of ranger-lovers that a change in the ranger class was needed. The FER ranger was just too unbalanced in relation to his two cousin fighters, the warrior and paladin, though admittedly more so the former than the latter.

The SER enables the ranger to retain some of the special combat skills, against the so-called "species enemies," some spell powers at higher level, and has given gamers and DMs alike an important delineation of his woodland and scouting skills: specifically how he is adept with animals, having the ability to move silently and hide in shadows, and having tracking as a non-weapon proficiency that can be augmented by study and experience rather than a base chance for success regardless of experience level. It has also made an important elimination of the unbalanced +1 hit point of damage per level from the FER, but has compensated for it by permitting the ranger to use two weapons in combat and the awarding of a +4 to hit against its species enemies. It has added a necessary, detrimental aspect to species enemies ability, in part to help balance the benefits of the bonus, but more to make a logical extension of the idea by charging a -4 reaction adjustment against the ranger when he encounters such creatures.

It has also placed feasible limits on the armor a ranger could wear, making logical sense in doing so and showing how more encumbering armor and/or gear would inhibit his basic skills -- no more FER rangers walking around in platemail +5, carrying 100 pounds of gear, and moving silently, hiding in shadows, and performing delicate tracking and scouting without hindrance and at the same level of proficiency.

Spells are logically limited to woodland or outdoor related spheres of power; Plant, and Animal. In my games, I allow elven or half-elven rangers who have as their primary god of worship either Corellon or Rillifane to add All, Weather and Sun to this list, and some humans similar benefits for certain gods of worship. No more are they able to cast all clerical spells and any magic-user spells as in the FER, balancing them more against the other fighter classes.

The warrior class still suffers, even though one melee and one missile weapon may be specialized, but this class is not my topic currently and will have to be left until later.

When I presented my idea for handling the new SER ranger to my friend and DM, Novice Will Nesbitt, I received back an unexpected and divergent opinion about the reasons for TSR including the current +4 bonus and -4 reaction adjustment when dealing with the species enemies, and that he still likes the +1 per level damage bonus from the FER. However, he basically agreed with me that the FER ranger was unbalanced compared to the other FER fighter classes, and that the SER ranger was an improvement. But the basis for the new species enemy bonuses was a point of contention.

I justified the +4 bonus to attack species enemies to the ranger's concentrated and constant experience with that particular creature or group of creatures. This was determined by the fact that the ranger selects his species enemy upon reaching 2nd-level, so that he has had time to get to know those creatures which, as the SER states, maraud his homeland. The +4 is, in my opinion, due to the ranger's familiarity with and study of such evildoers, their anatomy, their traits, their basic tactics, and importantly their environment. This careful study, which the ranger does during his training period and first level of experience, enables him from then on to combat such enemies with special advantage and thus the rationale for the +4. He knows their physical weaknesses and how to exploit them, knows their habitats and what environmental factors affect them, as well as their moral, physical, and psychological idiosyncrasies -- how to "punch their buttons" -- all factors he turns to his advantage against his species foes.

My list groups together creatures which I believe have broad similarities. Of course, some (notably Wilt) argue that a troll does not really fight like a lizardman, and is bigger than him, and that small kobolds prefer to fight in groups while the larger hobgoblin doesn't mind fighting alone. All true points. But I, in making these categories, have considered a number of factors, including general body structure, forms of society, intelligence, their home environs, and other factors, plus relative, average hit dice for each, their ability to make and use equipment, and their general outlook and alignment. These are all the factors that go into making a ranger knowledgeable about his species enemy and give him a bonus to attack as a result.

Will offers that the +4 bonus on attack rolls is due to the rage associated with the ranger having the evil enemies maraud his homeland, which resulted in the a cultivation of aggressive hatred in the ranger as he witnessed the slaughter of his people and animals, pillage of his village, etc. He also attributes the -4 reaction adjustment to this rage and hatred. I agree with the latter, and would suggest that the DM temper a player's choice for species enemy based on the ranger's homeland and exploits: if the ranger has never faced a dragon before, then he could hardly chose this category. But I disagree that the +4 is solely due to rage and hatred of the species in question, else the ranger would get his bonus when he first chooses his class, at 1st-level: there would be no necessity for waiting for 2nd-level to choose. The fact that the bonus is received after time and experience mould the ranger's prowess against the species enemy should prove that hatred is not the reason for the +4, though it is an important factor in the ranger's choosing of his particular species enemy.

Furthermore, I would think that rage would tend to cloud the ranger's judgement, not sharpen it, and in fact be a detriment to his melee skills. I realize that I'm applying "real world" logic to a "fantasy game," but I personally enjoy "realistic fantasy," or at least "consistent fantasy."

I don't think that the removing of the +1 damage bonus per ranger experience level was a bad thing, for reasons aforementioned, and it has been properly balanced by the two-weapon availability to a ranger and the bonus against the species enemy. In all, the new ranger class is definitely better, more detailed, and more playable.

Comments from Wizard Will

This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com