Message 19625 : Ranger Issues (Yvond)
Written on Thu Sep 26 18:34:41 2002

To:       "The Management"
From:     Yvond, Aspiring Ranger
Date:     Thu, Sep 26 2002 10:37 a.m. (MST)
Subject:  Ranger Issues

I humbly ask that you would read the entire message patiently, as I feel
that this message is important.  This isn't your typical "idea message",
but I was directed to the use of this command by you, so here goes...

First of all, I would like to offer an apology to any of the Ainur that
I have offended over the past couple of days.  I have created numerous
characters, requested two name changes for characters that were both 
originally named "Yvond", and was somewhat harshly denied a "newbie kit"
at least once due to another character that I was testing at the time.
I realize that you get numerous requests a day (an hour even), and that
seemingly insubordinate mortals are quite annoying.  My intention was not
to be difficult, or to "work the system" in any type of manner.

With that said, part of the reason why I spent some much time on my 
character creation is that I wanted to create a Ranger. No, not a Warrior,
not a Thief, not a Mage, not a Cleric, but *A Ranger*.  I understand that
there isn't a seperate Ranger class, but I have a burning desire to 
both role play and game play a character that is as true to Tolkien's world
as possible.  I read all the help files, logged all the newbie messages 
and books in the library in order to have an understanding of the world 
that you've created, and even looked completely offline and scoured the web
for ideas on how to create a character that was as true to form as possible.

Unfortunately, what I found wasn't all that useful in solving my problem.
I sought help from the Istari, but sadly, in the 20 or so hours that I've 
played, only 1 Istari was ever logged on, and he wouldn't even respond to me.
I sought help from the Rangers, but aside from Adianc, all I ever got were
one word answers from them.  All of the other characters didn't want to be
bothered with me, and of course, the newbies all know nothing.  I got so
desperate to find the information that I was looking for that I asked
multiple people if there was a "Ranger Message Board" that I could look at.
Adianc, a professed Ranger himself, and a high level character, didn't even
know that there was a Ranger Board in any of the Ranger training rooms to 
be found through out Arda!  As a result, I was forced into a character
experimentation mode, and landed myself in somewhat hot water with the 
higher powers that be.

I found Jahara's MUME page (http://nschimme.tripod.com/stats.htm) regarding
theoretical practice percentages and began to play with stats, but I had 
some specific questions that couldn't be answered without experimentation
and some definate answers from people.  And so I logged on, and asked about
things like whether people thought that Dex 15 Con 17 or Dex 16 Con 16 was
better in order to be a "well balanced Ranger".  Invariably, I got responses
like "All that matters is Str and Con, nothing else."  "Forget the mentals."
"There is no Ranger class, why are you trying to be one?" "You're a warrior,
not a Ranger!" But DAMN IT, I wanted to be *A RANGER*, even if that meant 
sacrificing a bit in other areas.  I made it a requirement to be able to 
fulfill all of the Ranger skills at least 100%, even if that meant I wouldn't
be able to be the best hack and slash tank, or dodge and run "Warrior" out 
there.  I wanted to get in the spirit of role playing the game without 
completely chucking game play out the window.

Above all, a Ranger endures in the task set before him.  And so, I'm sure 
you are all thinking, well, then he should have choose Con 18, not 16 or 17.
But, I couldn't.  Why?  Rangers aren't stupid, and they aren't dull witted
either.  Nor are they wimps when it comes to exerting their will, and have
a perception well above that of other mortal men.  To my suprise, I found
that what mattered most about enduring was not a high consitution, but the
endurance skill!  Having a 16 or 17 Con made no difference at low levels 
with regard to movement points, and only very slightly with regard to hit 
points.  Awareness could be trained as well, and luckily for men, there is
quite a bonus with regard to Willpower.

Now, I know that most of you are thining at this point int time, something
along the lines of "Who IS this freak?".  But please, bear with me.

Aragorn was a strong man, but also a man who was dextrous.  After all, he
never got hit in all the battles he participated in during The War of the 

Ring.  He was strong willed, but not so much as Boromir, was intellegent 
and wise, but not so much as Gandalf or Elrond, and could endure hardship
to great length, but that didn't necessarily mean that he had 1000 hit
hit points.  And so, I came up with a Ranger-eske character with the
following stats:

Str 17 Int 12 Wis 11 Dex 16 Con 16 Wil 14 Per 14

Now, I still go back and forth as to whether Str should have been 16 and 
Con 17, but I decided I didn't want to be completely useless as a fighter.

At any rate, what is the point of all this rambling???


Here is my Proposal

1.  Make a seperate Ranger class, and make us natural leaders.  After all,
Aragorn was argueably one of the most important characters, and he was a 
leader.  Make the rest of the characters dependent upon us for scouting,
orientation of the party in the wilderness, and aware of our surroundings.

2.  I've read numerous things from Petrel regarding role playing vs. game
playing, and I feel that he makes some strong points both ways.  I agree
with him that we shouldn't be able to go from Bree to Rivendell in a day,
but it doesn't need to take 2 weeks, either.  Gandalf made it there in about
2, if I remember correctly, by horse, which probably means a week on foot
along the rode.  Now, I realize that this is drastic, but:  could we
expand the landscape by 7-fold?

     Here me out on this.

This would make Rangers important, and would make adventuring a LOT more 
fun for everyone.  We would be required to get people to where they wanted 
to go, would have to look towards food supplies and figuring out where to
hunt, and the like.  Think about it.  Suddenly we would be dependent upon
other people and would naturally gravitate towards multiple-people parties.
Monsters wouldn't need to be regenerated so often with a larger world for
people to live in, and we wouldn't constantly be looting everyone's corpses.
We would need each other, which is one of the themes threaded throughout
Tolkien's writings.

In addition to this, isn't this a Tolkien-based world?  It is, by far, the
best one I've found to date, but that doesn't mean that it couldn't be 
improved upon.  How can there exist a Tolkien rp/gp world without Rangers
a class unto themselves?  Think about it, at least...

3.  Set up a Ranger Message Board for people interested in becoming Rangers.
It would allow us to get organized, and facilliate a way for us to dialogue
about this further.  In addition, it would foster a new community here in 
MUME.

4.Can we open up the rest of Arda, not just that travelled by the Fellowship
of the Nine?  I realize that this is A LOT of coding, and A LOT of work, 
and would not happen overnight, let alone a year.  But man, wouldn't it
be amazing to be able to explore ALL of Arda!?!?!

5.  Please Forgive Yvond for any grievances he has caused among the Ainur.
I've settled upon a character, and although it may not be the *best* one 
out there, I think that he will be fun to play.


Sincerely,

Yvond

+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Message 19629 : Re: Ranger Issues (Tharan)
Written on Fri Sep 27 06:03:12 2002

I'm glad that this was written, as I was planning to write something similar
myself. My brother and I discovered MUME when doing a search for text based
tolkien games.
I have since been on MUME semi-regularly for the last 2-3 years. My favorite
class to play on here is what is sometimes called the 'defensive fighter',
since RANGER seems to be a name applied to what other online RP games might
call guides.

I've never personally been higher than 20th level, but then, I also am not a
'hack slash to level' style of player. I prefer role playing, not necessarily
just as player's interaction with each other, but in how my characters interact
with the world.
So, as a 'ranger', I tend to explore the wildeness, hunt animals, pyre corpses
just 'laying around', and just generally clean up the landscape. needless to
say, killing your 100th fox doesn't give you 'fast levelling', but I find it
pleasant.

So from a role playing aspect, my character is a 'ranger', he just doesn't have
the class title.

Now when I sign on, my characters have a one letter abbreviation before their
listed level. I presume that W = Warrior, T = Thief, and so on. Why can I not
have R = Ranger? When going to Tolkien's works, I can find several seperate
types of 'rangers', such as the Dunedain rangers that protected the shire (from
wolves and the like), and the rangers of Faramir's company, and one might say
that fili and kili (Thorin's comment about those of his folk who were skilled
in outdoor craft - fire building, etc) were rangers of a type as well. SO I
believe that Rangers, those who are adept in the outdoors, but not necessarily
through the use of magic, knowledge of trails, paths, hunting, and so on would
be a most welcome addition to the game as an 'official' class, rather than just
a choice in 'change class'.

Rangers would also be a welcome addition to 'the war'. Imagine a perceptive
fighter who thieves would have difficulty backstabbing, since sneak might be
less effective. since from other posts I have read, 'sneeker orcs' are a
popular choice, I would presume that rangers would become so as well.

Now as far as 'suggestions' as to how to accomplish this 'in game'......

well first, there are already ranger guilds, so such an addition would not be
necessary. The class in this way at least would be a seamless addition. second,
the change class command also already identifies ranger skills when listing
class choices, so this would also not necessarily require much change. third,
the ranger skills themselves seem to apply to the class, though I might suggest
that 'ride' be moved to the stables, so that anywhere there are mounts, a
person could learn to ride, and thus 'ride' would not be a 'ranger-specific'
skill.

As far as the ranger's ability scores, I disagree with the author's comment
that strength and con are necessary to be as high as he made them. I think that
the ranger's main ability score (stat) is perception. I agree that the
endurance skill would be much more important that a high con. I am not
positive, but I believe that all nature skills (such as wilderness lore)
involve wisdom, so wis would be the ranger's secondary stat (and also may be
why rangers tend to be secondary healers as well.) third might be dex, and
fourth wil. Con, Str, and Int finishing up the stat list. obviously, stat
preference is VERY subjective, based on player preference.

WHen looking at this list, it's easy to see that several skills in 'other'
guilds would apply well to the ranger. 1.) warrior - besides weapon skills,
endurance would seem to be a must, and I would almost suggest that rescue be
moved to the ranger skill list. 2.) thief - hide search and sneak are all
obvious choices for the outdoors person, and perhaps the ranger guild could
have a 'find the pathhe path or portal' skill, which could replace the function
of 'search' for searching for 'doors' IN addition, since the thief class has
piercing (which is obviously appropriate for the class), maybe missile could be
moved to the ranger list as well. (since the Warriors buffer, the defensive
warrior tends to be a secondary buffer, and uses a missile weapon) 3.) cleric -
healing and outdoors spells, as well as stealth magics would seem to make sense
for the clerically minded ranger 4.) mage - same as cleric, though I have found
magic missile to be quite useful at slaying a rabbit or bird before it has a
chance to flee : )

Basically, I would suggest rescue and missile be moved to the ranger list, ride
as a 'general skill' moved to the stables, and a new 'find the path or portal'
skill for the ranger list as well.

As far as 'true' rangers, having 'of somewhere' attached to their names should
be clear enough. (Such as ranger of itilien, or ranger of the dunedain, etc.)

In closing, I just want to reiterate that I am strongly FOR having a ranger
class in the game : )

Tharan.

+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Message 19630 : Re: Ranger Issues (Tharan)
Written on Fri Sep 27 06:13:28 2002

I found the 'scout' choice in when you choose 'no' to being an experienced
player, to be a very misleading name, since it basically applies to thief.
scout would seem to be a low level ranger, not a thief. perhaps footpad, or
something might be more appropriate and less confusing (at least for me : )

Tharan

+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Message 19631 : Re: Ranger Issues (Tharan)
Written on Fri Sep 27 06:34:03 2002

When I investigated skills, I discovered that most ranger skills use WIL, not
WIS, which came as a surprise to me. Personally, I see nature skills to involve
wisdom (without becoming to cliched, the whole 'being one with the forest'
concept.)

but be that as it may, if the MUME makers see outdoors skills as WIL, then I
guess I would suggest that PER and WIL are the ranger's strongest stats, with
DEX and STR following behind.

Note, PER is NOT useful to rangers as the skills are now configured, but is
more focused for thieves. I see the ranger cless to be in between the thief and
warrior as far as skills are concerned. SO basically all ranger skills, plus
one or two skills from the others giving the character distinction.

As I said in my earlier posting, choices for stats are very subjective.
However, I see the ranger as being aware in an environment when others might
not be, as well as a stealth fighter.

something like the following:

Warrior: primary - Str and Con, secondary - Dex and Wil 
Thief: primary - Dex and Per, secondary - Int and maybe Wil
Ranger: primary - Per and Wil (Wis), secondary - Dex and Str

Tharan

+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Message 19632 : Re: Ranger Issues (Gamram)
Written on Fri Sep 27 09:57:24 2002

Wow.. Nice to  see someone still taking  the time to write a  long post.. I
however snipped out the parts I wasn't commenting on, to ease the reading.

> I sought  help from the  Rangers, but aside from  Adianc, all I  ever got
> were one word answers from them.  All of the other characters didn't want
> to be bothered  with me, and of  course, the newbies all  know nothing. I
> got so desperate  to find the information  that I was looking  for that I
> asked multiple people if there was  a "Ranger Message Board" that I could
> look at. Adianc, a professed Ranger  himself, and a high level character,
> didn't even  know that  there was  a Ranger  Board in  any of  the Ranger
> training rooms to be found through out Arda!

I guess you ran on bad luck about not getting help.. The rangers flagged as
such by the immortals (the ones listed in "who ranger") are usually willing
to help. Unless  of course if they  are already busy helping  others, or in
huge fights, ... (Or replying to some board ;-)

> 1. Make a seperate Ranger class,  and make us natural leaders. After all,
> Aragorn was  argueably one of the  most important characters, and  he was
> a  leader.  Make  the  rest  of the  characters  dependent  upon  us  for
> scouting, orientation  of the party in  the wilderness, and aware  of our
> surroundings.

This role is already  taken by the scouts (aka. thieves),  who have to know
the area to  survive, how to move  silently, ... Note that,  as said Finwe,
the  "Ranger" class  (as in  change class  ranger) is  always available  to
however have enough pracs in this type of skills.

Of  course  if they  are  scouts  they  aren't  warriors like  Aragorn..  I
personally find this  character (Gamram) pretty able to  perform his ranger
job.. Since I can swim, climb, bind wounds, heal a bit (cure light), track,
stay  a long  time without  having  to eat,  search,  and still  do a  good
defensive warrior  job to train  the young ones.  So, as said  Tharan, this
(sub-)class may  be what  you're looking  for in the  current state  of the
game.

> 4.Can  we open  up the  rest  of Arda,  not  just that  travelled by  the
> Fellowship of the Nine? I realize that this is A LOT of coding, and A LOT
> of  work, and  would not  happen overnight,  let alone  a year.  But man,
> wouldn't it be amazing to be able to explore ALL of Arda!?!?!

Small addition  on Finwe's reply: a  couple more zones near  BM/GH would be
good.. Since  whenever Bree is  being assaulted,  the only lowbie  XP place
become overpopulated (I seen on a board the idea of linking BM and Fornost,
I think).

So, to  summarize, it do is  possible to play a  ranger currently, although
some modifications may enhance the role.


Gamram