Forums » The Ranger

The Ranger - maybe not.. More like the Hunter/Archer

    • 23 posts
    September 22, 2019 2:24 PM PDT

    For better or worse - it looks like they want an Archer class or at the very least an Archer/R.A Salvatore ranger hybrid. Momentum is a really cool idea but to pigon hole the melee portion of this class into a Drizzt role is really sad. Are we going to narrow it down even more to blades or maybe short swords only? Have you removed the option to have a long and short sword? How about a mace or an axe? 

     

    Still very early so not giving up yet on this class but this is not a great start imo. Will be interesting to finally get into Alpha at somepoint and help the vision... 

     

    Edit:

    Noticed they took two handed weapons away from Warriors too...


    This post was edited by Sabatour at September 22, 2019 2:31 PM PDT
    • 3 posts
    October 31, 2019 7:01 PM PDT

    I don't see them limiting rangers to just a short sword or just a sword. They have expressed in past videos that different weapons will be needed for different types of armor on NPC's. I feel rangers should definitely be able to wield swords, axes daggers, maces, and whips. That is just personal opinion, but from the past videos I do not believe rangers will be limited to just swords. 

    • 508 posts
    November 1, 2019 5:12 AM PDT

    Even on the main site it's written: Bows, Crossbows and MOST one-handed weapons. But as you've pointed out yourself - it's still pretty early on, so everything may change.

     

    Edit: When did they took 2-h weapons from Warriors? It's just many of their abilities require shield and their main role is as a tank, but it's not like you can't make warrior wielding 2-h sword with strictly offensive set of abilities.


    This post was edited by Hegenox at November 1, 2019 5:17 AM PDT
    • 72 posts
    November 1, 2019 8:37 AM PDT

    VR has stated the Ranger will be weaving in and out of ranged and melee, and Joppa stated it would still be viable if someone wants to play strictly ranged or melee.  I don't think this will be an issue, and there are still a ton more skills/abilities that have not been revealed yet across the board.  I didn't get the impression of only swords from the videos either, but yes everything is still early and under wraps.


    This post was edited by Geoffrey at November 1, 2019 8:45 AM PDT
    • 299 posts
    January 29, 2020 10:29 AM PST

    Seems like a Ranger to me, in EQOA and EQ2, the Ranger's primary source of damage was with a bow.

    • 4397 posts
    January 29, 2020 12:54 PM PST

    Hegenox said:

    Edit: When did they took 2-h weapons from Warriors? It's just many of their abilities require shield and their main role is as a tank, but it's not like you can't make warrior wielding 2-h sword with strictly offensive set of abilities.

    They didn't... It seems like the OP might be misreading some things. The class description for Warrior specifically says "All weapons." Warriors will probably find it best to alternate between 2H and S&B situationally to be as effective as possible.

    • 762 posts
    January 29, 2020 4:46 PM PST

    My advice is to try to enjoy the game as its own creation instead of comparing the classes to other games.  This is what I had to do in order to accept the fact that some of the classes are named and even modeled after other games in some respect while others are very different.

    The class names don't really mean a whole lot if comparing to them to other games.  A lot of the class identities are subjective:
    -Bards  (by definition: lore keepers/story tellers/performers) yet melee combatants wearing full plate armor (like EQ except for the available classes)
    -Druids in most other games use shapeshifting or summoning natural beast companions to fight for them as their primary strength - this Druid can do neither (like EQ except for the available classes)
    -Shaman being about ancestral knowledge/spirituality and yet not playable by isolated races obsessed with their ancestry like Dark Myr and instead accessible to the short lived and highly civilized Humans, and for some reason get a permanent wolf or bear pet even though the Druid and Ranger don't.  (like EQ except for the available classes)

    With the exception of the Dire Lord, I think that a lot of inspiration for the classes get their flavor from EQ.  Dire Lord is probably the only unique/new class "name" in PRotF that can't be subjected to opinion based solely on its name.

    So if you really want to enjoy the Ranger, just play it for what the game makes it out to be because comparing it to other games/lore may only dissapoint you.