Forums » The Ranger

What a ranger is - what a ranger is not...

    • 13 posts
    June 13, 2017 1:09 PM PDT

    A Ranger is a skilled combatant who also happens to be a expert outdoorsman. A Ranger is most comfortable in the wilderness.

    A Ranger tends to specialize in a particular style of combat weather that is duel wielding form, two handed weapon form or missile form....The form which a Ranger chooses to specialize in is quite unique to the Ranger class. A warrior using any of these forms fight very differently compared with a Ranger.

    Rangers tend to wear lighter armor for several reasons. First they specialize in a particular style of combat which requires mobility. Second many of their outdoor skills would be hampered in heavier armor. Its rare to find a ranger in anything heavier then a chain shirt. And in the case of missile specialists they tend to not wear anything heavier then a leather breast plate.

    A rangers outdoor skills vary on the region the ranger comes from but in general Tracking, particular wilderness survival skills and wilderness skill sets, Outdoor Stalking/stealth, herb lore, animal lore, plant lore.

    A Ranger is nothing like a Rogue. A rogue usually has a limited weapon skill set and a rogues combat skill sets are positional. A rogue skills are much different in scope as well disarm traps, open locks etc etc.

    • 90 posts
    June 13, 2017 6:29 PM PDT

    @Iviean Yeah, was talking current EQ rangers.  Back in the day, mobs would cross a full zone jut to kill me and not harm anyone else in my group.  Think rangers gave mobs double xp per kill.  I remember finally questing my Wakizashi of the Frozen Skies.  No tank wanted to group because I could not shed aggro once it proced.  We were aggro magnets but in current live EQ, we are the boss, hands down for getting and shedding it.  Rangers are some serious CC now with survivability, tankability, soloability, utility, and DPS.  Might play again while waiting for pre-alpha access.  Talking about EQ makes me miss it lol.

    • 6 posts
    July 11, 2017 1:51 PM PDT


    To me to be interested in an MMO it should have a viable Archer class. How they get there I don't care, but I feel many many many people feel the same way. 

    I'd like to see a ranger that"

    - Has the ability to move faster than others outdoors

    - Archery is primary DPS, all other weapons near equal but less DPS than archery

    - No magic

    - Invisibly the same as a rogue, always, no indoor vs outdoor

    - Track

    - Making bows and arrows (fletching) extremely important

    - Carry multiple types of bows and arrows (we will all carry more than is ever close to realistic.)

    - Poison making important for slows, roots, snared, dots, blinds ect...

    - Leather or cloth armor. Armor weight (not bag weight) makes you worse

    - No auto bow

    - All shots fired are like spells, you pick what arrow to fire

    - Collecting fired arrows after you kill an enemy (an amount of them)

    - Maybe some short use defensive ability

    The class should fill the role of a DPS class with useful personal utility.

    The debate is not really about what a ranger should be, it's about people that want Archery that is not pointless VS Devs that only give archery to a single class, and then make it sub par.

    I'd personally like to see rogues be the archer class, why should it matter if you do DPS with a dagger or a bow if you can't take a hit? That said I also feel rangers are really just rogues with no backstab, however in a game where if you are not top notch at either healing/tanking/DPS you are filler or worthless being a useless tank and a ok dpser will lead the class into the background in groups and raids.

    I don't get this idea that rangers need to charm animals as a DPSing pet, it's so silly and far left I can't stand that it's represented in the conversation... It's simply another way to water down the class and make it worthless because if it were strong at anything one thing it would be massively OP considering how much "other" stuff the class could do.

    It's always shocking to me how many, how vocal and how much input is given on a Archery using class a community goes and it seems to go ignored by Devs.

    In my eyes you could make an incredibly interesting class that people love, or we can see more of a class that leaves so many shaking their heads as to why the time was wasted even gluing so many weak abilities together.


    Mage is similar to Wizzy = Utility/DPS

    Druid is similar to Necro similar to Shaman = Utility/Dots (heals)

    Ranger similar to Rogue similar to Monk= DPS/Utility

    Pally similar to SK similar to War = Tank/Agro

    Cleric similar to Shaman similar to Druids = Heals/buffs/Utility

    Enchanter = OP!!!!


    Yes Sham/Druids are mentioned twice. Their Utility is usually the best, and because of that they can be less DPS than a pure DPS class and less of a healer than a Pure healer and still be very viable as a class.


    This post was edited by Avory at July 11, 2017 1:55 PM PDT
    • 190 posts
    July 14, 2017 9:26 PM PDT
    What you just described is an Archer, not a Ranger. That class has its place, but I would like to see them go a different route for the Ranger. I don't understand why people associate poisons and traps with rangers. Those are rogue traits. Traps I can understand, but they're rarely useful in MMOs.

    Regardless...I think the easiest way to solve this issue is to allow two paths and to allow each player to choose what they want to play.

    Rangers are scouts. I think they should have perception bonuses and some kind of exploration bonus. Stealth and movement speed should be high too.
    • 6 posts
    July 15, 2017 1:44 PM PDT

    Ashvaild said: What you just described is an Archer, not a Ranger. That class has its place, but I would like to see them go a different route for the Ranger. I don't understand why people associate poisons and traps with rangers. Those are rogue traits. Traps I can understand, but they're rarely useful in MMOs. Regardless...I think the easiest way to solve this issue is to allow two paths and to allow each player to choose what they want to play. Rangers are scouts. I think they should have perception bonuses and some kind of exploration bonus. Stealth and movement speed should be high too.


    I assume you are talking about me?

    First the topic is asking "what is a rangers is to you?" To me a ranger is not defined my one or more persons story. I also stated that I'm after an archer class and almost all MMO's that I know of attach archery to the ranger class and make it fully worthless for any other class. I'd be perfectly happy with a Archer class in pantheon, in fact I'd bet the "ranger" class would be almost nonexistent if there were a useful DPS Archer class in pantheon. Very few players I have met want to play a confused class with mid ranger skill/magic/utility sets as it's very hard to make a class relevant without making then OP.  

    To me it makes perfect sense to have poisons be important to a class like rangers, in fact it seems silly to limit something like poisons to a single class like rogues. Outside of that I'm not seeing how my list was "not a ranger" outside of if you are in the camp of Ranger = Archery, or the camp of Ranger = 1h/2h/shield set up.


    Anyways I'm not trying to argue, simply give my version of something I'd like to see in a game for me to be interested in that game. If rangers are the lost cause they were in EQ until PoP I have no interest. For the record Rangers in EQ were so horrible (yes fanboi rangers loved them anyway) until Luclin, however AA's were incredibly slow and almost no rangers had EQ and AM3 until the release of PoP. That's when rangers because an important class, when Archery mattered. Archery was nerfed and rangers hardly used the bow for a huge amount of years till Archery was made relevant again, and then Rangers started to matter once again.

    I started EQ Feb 1 2001 and played a ranger as my main since then, still even today. These are just my opinions and my experience. Whatever they Do in pantheon I won't know for some time, I simply wanted to have the opportunity to get my voice heard. They are allowed to do whatever they want and If I don't like it I won't complain, I'll just not play... But from the looks of it they will have enough subs without me so =)

    • 30 posts
    August 8, 2017 9:15 AM PDT

    I hope for a ranged (Bow & quiver) damage dealing dps class that can melee if needed


    track(maybe a pet hawk for tracking)



    daze or confuse or control wild animals to some degree

    move across terrain with ease and speed

    • 4 posts
    October 16, 2017 4:41 PM PDT

    Elrandir said:

    I would love to see a throw-back to more of an old-school 2nd Ed. D&D style of ranger. Basically a warrior that chooses to live on the fringe of society. More Aragorn than Legolas, I'd like to see a healthy mix of both offensive and defensive abilities. Some ideas taken from the 2nd Edition players handbook that could be simulated within Pantheon:

    Primary Terrain: Rangers chose a primary terrain with which they had a familiarity with and would see bonuses to skills when in those types of regions. For Pantheon, with the addition of the environments it would be really cool if rangers had an innate mitigation to the harmful environmental effects that occured near their starting cities. This would mean they would likely be race-dependent, with halflings (assuming they can be rangers) having a knowledge of hazards that occur near Wild's End. Humans might be familiar with conditions around Thronefast, etc.

    Species Enemies: Rangers were expected to choose a species enemy against which they got an attack bonus. As an example, for halfling rangers--wraiths would be an obvious choice just based off of the lore that's been revealed so far.

    I'm sure other traits of these classic rangers could be emulated in Pantheon as well.

    Just my 2cp!




     I Agree with Elrandir and would love to see Rangers go old school like in D&D rangers where the only class to duel wield with out penalty and they lived on the fringe/outskirts they hated cities and built up public areas. They used bows but not as much as melee weapons but they were more specialized melee weapons focused on dex not str. Every attempt to build a Ranger in a game every game makes them useless and thinks they have to be ranged bow class which is not true. Only reason Rangers are good with a bow is because it was a dex based weapon in D&D prime example for lore and books one name says it all Drizzt Do'Urden.

    Please pantheon make the Ranger useful unlike in EQ Rangers. EQ Rangers where fun but no one wanted them they were not viable dps or tank so they had no fit so the class kinda died off. I played it still no matter what was just lucky i was in a guild that new I was a good player and I was an awsome Ranger in old school EQ days was a better puller outdoors than a monk thanks to harmony and snare :).

    And for all those I am talking Rangers before SOV, & POP

    • 109 posts
    October 16, 2017 5:06 PM PDT

    I feel this is a common misconception amongst eq players because of the jokes and mockery that was mad about rangers.  But rangers were always useful in eq.  A good ranger would have different gear if he was going to dps vs tank (and rangers could tank).  Good rangers tracked for your group, made amazing pullers and could very effectively cc (through snaring rooting and kiting). 


    Now obviously you wouldn't see a ranger tanking in a raid, bhut almost any exp group would succeed with a ranger just fine.

    • 4 posts
    October 16, 2017 6:41 PM PDT

    Another thought on Rangers they are not a hybrid of Warrior and Druid, they are a warrior they put society behind them and lived off the land aka survivalist. They should not beable to Main tank or even off tank but step in and temperarily tank in a pinch from skills and agility aka avoidance and weapon skills aka parry. As someone mentioned lord of the rings Aragorn when he fought he was not a meat shield nor did he wear heavy armor. Also, with a bow he was not as good as Legolas which was a bow master. Aragorn had a 2hand sword, dagger, knife and sword and a short bow. Everything he needed to live off the land he could carry. 

    Drizzt did not wear heavy armor either. base the Ranger class off those two characters and you will get it right in game :)

    And yes some of you all will complain that Drizzt had a pet well Guenhwyvar was a panther pet she was magical and came from a onyx figurine and she was from the astral plane. Drizzt did not get this because he was a Ranger He Aquired a magical figurine.