Create the Ranger Class

[q42]

I would like a new class that would combine the melee abilities (and gambit system) of the warden with the range skills of the hunter. In addition, there would be some skills from the burglar class. The new class would be in essence an upgraded version of the hunter. The new class would only have a single trait tree. Skills would unlock based on your toon's level. There would be NO CLASS QUESTS REQUIRED for this class. The effectiveness of the skills would depend on the frequency of use of that particular skill. This leveling of skills would share some similarities present in the game skyrim.

The new class would NOT have any legendary items typical of other classes. Instead this class would have extra slots for jewelry. Toons with high tinker skills and high Jeweller's Guild rep would be able to create rings (and other jewelry ) of power usable only to this class. The rings (and other jewelry ) of power would become more powerful with experience.


The new class would not be able to use shields. However this class would be able to duel wield weapons.


This class would have a skill leveling for single weapon type such as daggers somewhat similar to what is present in the game skyrim. For example, this new class with a really high dagger skill would have a higher dps and a much higher evade, block rating than any other class using the same dagger.

class damage using a weapon = weapon normal damage + weapon skill modifer


For example

a dagger has dps of 10
a has a dagger skill of 100

dagger dps = 10 + ranger weapon skill modifer
= 10 + 20
= 30 (plus evade and block rating would be much higher while wielding daggers)




The new class weapon skills would be divide by the types of weapons.

ie. swords, daggers, maces, bows, etc



This class would have all the crafting skills available. However only one of the crafting professions would be able to level normally. The rest of the crafting professions would be slower to level.


This class would NOT be able to participate in any pvp. This is to ensure the balance is not affected in the pvp areas.

The new class is to be store bought using TP. Some players could argue that it will create another imbalanced class like the warden or the runekeeper. That could be true. It would depend on how Turbine creates this new class. However I doubt it is possible to perfectly balance all the classes. I would say that it is even desirable to NOT HAVE Turbine mess around too much with the various classes based on their past attempts to find “balance”. This would only serve to annoy players who have their toons nerfed. The better solution would be to have higher instance tiers for increased difficulty. This would be to satisfy hardcore lotro players who will complain that they can faceroll T1 or T2. Make extra tiers of difficulty ….such as T3, T4, and T5 for instances.

[Radhruin_EU]

You know, most people would look at this game and think hmm, if there isn't a Ranger class already in a game that's been around as long as this one has then there's probably a good reason why not. Anyway: nope, because Rangers = Dunedain, Dunedain = not playable, and a lot of the content is based on the Rangers in particular being NPCs (as, again, you should have noticed). On top of that, the Rangers were NOT adventurers, they were basically Special Forces guys in military service to their lord (Aragorn or Denethor, depending) and so wouldn't be wandering all over Middle-earth picking up sticks for Dwarves and all the other stuff player-characters get up to in this game.

Also, away with that annoying dual-wield stereotype, this isn't D&D. The other game mechanics you mention... no, man, wholesale changes like that are a non-starter. One particular fail, the jewellery thing - since when do Rangers go in for bling?

[Vilan]

So you want the melee and gambit system that wardens have, plus ranged skills, like wardens have, plus burg skills... I'm guessing sneakiness? Like wardens have? Except they can't use shields. Or LIs. And have a totally new damage calculation system. I really can't see anything here a warden can't already do, other than craft everything, and there's a bunch of new complications added on.

Don't forget you can already play a ranger if you go to the Moors.

[YamydeAragon]

Ranger NPCs on LOTRO are punny hunters that always die too soon & need players protection. Who in its sane mind want to be a ranger?

[q42]

You know, most people would look at this game and think hmm, if there isn't a Ranger class already in a game that's been around as long as this one has then there's probably a good reason why not. Anyway: nope, because Rangers = Dunedain, Dunedain = not playable, and a lot of the content is based on the Rangers in particular being NPCs (as, again, you should have noticed). On top of that, the Rangers were NOT adventurers, they were basically Special Forces guys in military service to their lord (Aragorn or Denethor, depending) and so wouldn't be wandering all over Middle-earth picking up sticks for Dwarves and all the other stuff player-characters get up to in this game.

Also, away with that annoying dual-wield stereotype, this isn't D&D. The other game mechanics you mention... no, man, wholesale changes like that are a non-starter. One particular fail, the jewellery thing - since when do Rangers go in for bling?

1. I am not an expert on the lotr lore. However it seems to me that lotro does not perfectly adhere to the lore. I believe having the Ranger class is possible (if turbine made the Beorn class possible within the game). The new class of toon does not have to be called a Ranger. The class could be called Scout or something else if it means it fits in better with the lore.


2. They would get lesser rings of power instead of legendary items. This could fit in with the lotr lore better than legendary items.

[YamydeAragon]

... The new class of toon does not have to be called a Ranger. The class could be called Scout or something else if it means it fits in better with the lore...

You are still describing a hunter. All classes have class specific jewelry & armor at higher levels.

[Radhruin_EU]

1. I am not an expert on the lotr lore. However it seems to me that lotro does not perfectly adhere to the lore. I believe having the Ranger class is possible (if turbine made the Beorn class possible within the game). The new class of toon does not have to be called a Ranger. The class could be called Scout or something else if it means it fits in better with the lore.

You just plain don't know the game if you think it'd work - there's a ton of content that relies entirely on player-characters *not* being Rangers and which would make no sense whatsoever for characters who were. And as I said the Rangers weren't adventurers, so the whole idea of them going around doing random stuff for random people and being rewarded for it wouldn't work either. The devs made the decision to keep them as NPCs long, long ago and built large chunks of the game around that. So yeah, call it something else - but that still leaves your dubious ideas for the gameplay, and whatever you call it won't improve those.

2. They would get lesser rings of power instead of legendary items. This could fit in with the lotr lore better than legendary items.

That's a truly awful notion. Even leaving aside how cheesy it'd be for every man and his dog to have a Ring of Power, what the heck has that got to do with Rangers? Or anybody else, for that matter?

[Nymphonic]

Ranger NPCs on LOTRO are punny hunters that always die too soon & need players protection. Who in its sane mind want to be a ranger?

I laughed hard and loud when I read this. Good Lord, that was funny.

[Langie]

And here was I thinking that April 1st happened a couple of months back

[q42]

So you want the melee and gambit system that wardens have, plus ranged skills, like wardens have, plus burg skills... I'm guessing sneakiness? Like wardens have? Except they can't use shields. Or LIs. And have a totally new damage calculation system. I really can't see anything here a warden can't already do, other than craft everything, and there's a bunch of new complications added on.

Don't forget you can already play a ranger if you go to the Moors.

1. This new class would have a single trait tree. Not the current three common among the classes.

2. Skills would unlock based on the toon's level. No points are required. No class quests are required for this class. Frequency of use of a particular skill will increase the effectiveness of that skill.

3. This new class would be an upgraded version of the hunter. The melee ability of the warden with the range skills of the hunter. This new class would have some limited burglar skills. i.e some stealth

4. This would not be considered a tanking class like the warden. Hence the reason why this new class does not have a shield. The stealth abilities would allow this new class to avoid fighting. This could be useful when you only need to kill an enemy boss and you do not feel like spending time killing the mob. The stealth abilities would also be useful for avoiding tough mobs.

5. I suggested reusing the warden melee skills in order to increase the difficulty of using this new class and to give this new class better melee skills than the hunter. Reusing the skills of the warden, hunter and burglar should make developing this new class easier for turbine. Having a single trait tree should make balancing this class easier for turbine. I believe this new type of trait tree could be superior to what Turbine currently has. The new class would be a dps class. It is not a tanking class. I see this class as having good ranged damaged. However the superior melee skills of this class when compared to the hunter would allow this new class to be better able to help out in melee combat in short burst. This class would not have the survivability of the warden. The survivability of this new class would be better than the hunter.

6. I think being able to craft anything would be appreciated by some lotro players.

7. I did not realize you could play the ranger class in the moors since I have not bothered with any pvp in the moors nor will I ever care to.

8. I think calling this new class the scout class would be fine. I don't mine if it is called something else as long as this new class is made.

9. I dislike the current system used for legendary items. I also dislike the trait trees. This is my own opinion. Some players might love the current system. Everybody has things they like or dislike about lotro. I realize that the likelihood of turbine making changes to the trait trees or to legendary items is extremely slim at best. Turbine might be encouraged to make this new (scout) class if they could make money off it. The new (scout) class would allow turbine to try a different skill system without risk making the majority of lotro players angry.

[Radhruin_EU]

3. This new class would be an upgraded version of the hunter. The melee ability of the warden with the range skills of the hunter. This new class would have some limited burglar skills. i.e some stealth

No, it couldn't be an upgraded version of anything. If they did a class like this then for the sake of balance it would have to be less powerful at range than the hunter (since it could do more than just range, and you say it would have better survivability), less good in melee than the warden (or indeed any other melee class) because it's got range as well, plus it's got stealth (where it'd have to be weaker than the Burglar, e.g. by not having as much burst damage from stealth). You can't just grab all the good stuff and give it to one class in full measure, if you have a range/melee hybrid then it'd have to be outperformed by classes that specialised in either ranged or melee. Otherwise, it'd be imbalanced.

That makes this one trait tree idea of yours really dubious as well. Having the usual three could allow some specialisation (i.e. ranged, melee or stealth) which could then allow this class to reduce the gap between it and the specialised ones for whatever the player chose to specialise in. Otherwise, if you insist on a jack of all trades then it would necessarily be master of none and its flexibility would be its only asset.

Also, it's just as well you didn't imagine it being used in the Moors because combining ranged damage-dealing and stealth is a no-no, it's imbalanced (essentially because it makes it too easy to ambush people from stealth and burst them down). Besides, you might have a personal dislike of PvMP but think before you post, of course it would have to be playable in the Moors as well because there'd be other players who'd demand that.

[Fatty]

Do the Rangers lore-wise, outside of Jackson's Movies and LoTRO, really make much use of ranged weapons at all? They seem to be melee only, pretty much? A lore-friendly Ranger would probably be more like a medium-armour wearing sword and shield-equipped Captain...

[Nosdracir]

Do the Rangers lore-wise, outside of Jackson's Movies and LoTRO, really make much use of ranged weapons at all? They seem to be melee only, pretty much? A lore-friendly Ranger would probably be more like a medium-armour wearing sword and shield-equipped Captain...

Faramir's force of Rangers of Ithilien used bows when they ambushed the Haradrim force in The Two Towers.

[Nymphonic]

Faramir's force of Rangers of Ithilien used bows when they ambushed the Haradrim force in The Two Towers.

Gameplay mechanics wise, they seem more like the hunter class though.

[ertr]

Do the Rangers lore-wise, outside of Jackson's Movies and LoTRO, really make much use of ranged weapons at all? They seem to be melee only, pretty much? A lore-friendly Ranger would probably be more like a medium-armour wearing sword and shield-equipped Captain...

Other than Aragorn we actually see very little of the Rangers of the North in LoTR. There is the Grey Company, but we never see them in action.
They are described as carrying spear and sword and bow though.

The Rangers of Ithilien (commanded by Faramir) also use spears, bows, and swords.

[Nosdracir]

Gameplay mechanics wise, they seem more like the hunter class though.

I agree. Tolkien's Rangers inspired the Dungeons & Dragons Ranger class, starting a tradition of bow and dual weapon woodsy fighters in RPGs and MMOs. The OP's suggestion seems to be taking the end result of decades of Ranger class evolution in games and plugging it into the original source. That conflicts with the existing Ranger NPCs as well as the lore. Kinda like taking soldiers from the 75th Inf and adding them to Major Rogers company in 1754.

[q42]

No, it couldn't be an upgraded version of anything. If they did a class like this then for the sake of balance it would have to be less powerful at range than the hunter (since it could do more than just range, and you say it would have better survivability), less good in melee than the warden (or indeed any other melee class) because it's got range as well, plus it's got stealth (where it'd have to be weaker than the Burglar, e.g. by not having as much burst damage from stealth). You can't just grab all the good stuff and give it to one class in full measure, if you have a range/melee hybrid then it'd have to be outperformed by classes that specialised in either ranged or melee. Otherwise, it'd be imbalanced.

That makes this one trait tree idea of yours really dubious as well. Having the usual three could allow some specialisation (i.e. ranged, melee or stealth) which could then allow this class to reduce the gap between it and the specialised ones for whatever the player chose to specialise in. Otherwise, if you insist on a jack of all trades then it would necessarily be master of none and its flexibility would be its only asset.

Also, it's just as well you didn't imagine it being used in the Moors because combining ranged damage-dealing and stealth is a no-no, it's imbalanced (essentially because it makes it too easy to ambush people from stealth and burst them down). Besides, you might have a personal dislike of PvMP but think before you post, of course it would have to be playable in the Moors as well because there'd be other players who'd demand that.

1. The new (Scout) class would be balanced WHEN COMPARED to the warden or the Rune-Keeper. The class would have better ranged damage than the warden with less morale regeneration than the warden. Some players would argue that Rk and warden are imbalanced and need to be nerf. I doubt this will happen to any great extent.....because these classes are sold in the store. I also doubt that turbine will spend much time rebalancing the free classes and making them balanced when compared to the warden or rk.....because the free classes are free and they have fewer developers working on lotro than in the past. Some players will argue that the quests and instances are too easy now and classes need to be nerfed. I doubt this will happen. Turbine likely decided to make lotro easy in order to attract a wider audience to this game. A possible solution is to make extra tiers of difficult (T3,T4,T5) in instances. This could placate some players who say that they can faceroll over T1 or T2 instances.

2.The damage while in stealth would be less than the burglar. The stealth would be useful for avoiding tough mobs. Stealth would also be useful when you do not want to spend the time killing mobs when you only need to kill the enemy boss.

3. The single trait tree idea is NOT dubious. Classes right now have good skills spread out among the three trait lines. Imagine if all the skills were available to your class that you play. Skills would automatically unlock as you level up. YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO DO ANY QUESTS IN ORDER TO OBTAIN TRAIT POINTS. I am sure this would be appealing to experienced lotro players with multiple alts who are tired of having to do quests again in order to pick up trait points. The actual skills that you use would become more potent through usage. For example, a particular skill frequently used could have increased dps , lower induction times, and or lower cool down timer. Turbine simply does not have the economic incentive to make changes for all classes. This new (scout) class would be store bought. Experienced players might decide to buy the new (scout) class and continue playing lotro. This would give turbine the incentive to make the new class. Plus, it would not affect players who currently like having trait trees. Making skills more potent through usage would make legendary items largely unnecessary.

4. The single trait tree of the new (scout) class would have a more flexible specialization than the current traits tree common among the current classes. Skills would become more potent through usage. For example, a player who spent a lot of time using melee skills would obtain more potent melee skills. This new single trait tree would better adapt to each individual player style of play.

5. I recommend that this new (scout) class would NOT be able to do pvp in the moors, because I do not want to upset the balance in the moors. There is already plenty of classes available for the moors. The inability to do pvp in the moors must be clearly stated when this new (scout) class is sold in the store.

[Aedfrith]

You missed some features.
Automatic 90000 bonus to ICMR.
AOE burst heal of 40000 morale on demand.
Ability to buff self for 30000% dps.

[Radhruin_EU]

1. The new (Scout) class would be balanced WHEN COMPARED to the warden or the Rune-Keeper. The class would have better ranged damage than the warden with less morale regeneration than the warden. Some players would argue that Rk and warden are imbalanced and need to be nerf. I doubt this will happen to any great extent.....because these classes are sold in the store. I also doubt that turbine will spend much time rebalancing the free classes and making them balanced when compared to the warden or rk.....because the free classes are free and they have fewer developers working on lotro than in the past. Some players will argue that the quests and instances are too easy now and classes need to be nerfed. I doubt this will happen. Turbine likely decided to make lotro easy in order to attract a wider audience to this game. A possible solution is to make extra tiers of difficult (T3,T4,T5) in instances. This could placate some players who say that they can faceroll over T1 or T2 instances.

Whatever, you couldn't have a class that was that strong in both ranged and melee and had stealth on top of that. Something's got to give. Suggesting it could be that imbalanced because people would be paying for it is a joke. As you've described it, we ought to call it the Faceroll class. Wise up, already.

2.The damage while in stealth would be less than the burglar. The stealth would be useful for avoiding tough mobs. Stealth would also be useful when you do not want to spend the time killing mobs when you only need to kill the enemy boss.

A class that can do that has to be limited in other ways if it's not to be imbalanced. Being able to casually bypass content and then faceroll the boss is not on.

3. The single trait tree idea is NOT dubious. Classes right now have good skills spread out among the three trait lines. Imagine if all the skills were available to your class that you play. Skills would automatically unlock as you level up. YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO DO ANY QUESTS IN ORDER TO OBTAIN TRAIT POINTS. I am sure this would be appealing to experienced lotro players with multiple alts who are tired of having to do quests again in order to pick up trait points. The actual skills that you use would become more potent through usage. For example, a particular skill frequently used could have increased dps , lower induction times, and or lower cool down timer. Turbine simply does not have the economic incentive to make changes for all classes. This new (scout) class would be store bought. Experienced players might decide to buy the new (scout) class and continue playing lotro. This would give turbine the incentive to make the new class. Plus, it would not affect players who currently like having trait trees. Making skills more potent through usage would make legendary items largely unnecessary.

Oh of course, you want to have all the good skills without having to make any trade-offs. Again, not realistic - they'd never design a class that way.

4. The single trait tree of the new (scout) class would have a more flexible specialization than the current traits tree common among the current classes. Skills would become more potent through usage. For example, a player who spent a lot of time using melee skills would obtain more potent melee skills. This new single trait tree would better adapt to each individual player style of play.

And what would prevent a character of this class eventually becoming 'potent' at everything with enough grinding and hence madly overpowered? How would you limit it to prevent that? (A limited pool of upgrade points to spread around the various skills, for example).

5. I recommend that this new (scout) class would NOT be able to do pvp in the moors, because I do not want to upset the balance in the moors. There is already plenty of classes available for the moors. The inability to do pvp in the moors must be clearly stated when this new (scout) class is sold in the store.

That's a tacit admission this class would be overpowered. Get real - people would want to take a new class into the Moors, so it'd have to be broadly comparable with other classes, not this demigod you've got in mind.

[Thundertrain]

You missed some features.
Automatic 90000 bonus to ICMR.
AOE burst heal of 40000 morale on demand.
Ability to buff self for 30000% dps.

[Coruven]

2. They would get lesser rings of power instead of legendary items. This could fit in with the lotr lore better than legendary items.

Only if they are a Creep class on the Moors. All the rings of power were corrupted by Sauron. The magic of rings of power is founded on the existence of the One Ring and all rings of power corrupt the user. Even the Three created for the Elven Lords apart from Sauron are linked to the One Ring and using them is dangerous at the time of the books when Sauron is once again active in the world.

Anyone using a ring of power would eventually fall under the power of Sauron, just the Nazgul, Sauruman, Denethor and Boromir were all overwhelmed by using items of power.

[Pontin_Finnberry]

The new class would not be able to use shields.

they have to have shield use its part of lore info from wikipedia:

The Rangers were grim in life, appearance, and dress, choosing to wear rusty green and brown. The Rangers of the Grey Company (see below) were dressed in dark grey cloaks and openly wore a silver brooch shaped like a pointed star during the War of the Ring. These Rangers rode rough-haired, sturdy horses, were helmeted and carried shields. Their armament included spears and bows.

[GozmitJosh]

I dislike having all the skills just unlocked once you reach certain levels, i enjoyed having to go through class quests to at least unlock 2 skills.

Even the current way i dislike as all i get is a class trait point.

Just veeeeeeeeeeeeery boring to me to have it that way it is which is like 90% of all other mmo games out there that ive tried.

[Brian_G]

It came up in discussion in-game that maybe a Ranger class that was 50/50 Hunter/Captain would be both viable and lore-friendly. The three lines could be Ranged, Melee, Healer -- but these would just be for emphasis and all Rangers could do all three but just have slightly different skills in each area as emphasis. As mentioned above they could not be better than Hunters in Ranged, but would have better melee and heals. In Melee they couldn't be better than a Captain (Red line) (esp. since Rangers would not have a Companion for added DPS), but would have better Ranged ability. Finally, they would not be as good as a Captain for heals and buffs, but would have a few unique heals and also have better Ranged in this mode, too. Not sure if Rangers should be Might or Agility based, but maybe an even split would work. They could even be set up for Medium armor by default, but have a skill to use Heavy armor but only in Red line. If their use of Might and Agility for Physical Mastery was equal, but less than what other classes use for their prime stat, then Rangers could use armor for both Hunters and Beornings, but not quite as well as those classes. Also, if they did use Heavy armor in Red line, it wouldn't be quite as well as Guards, Champs or Captains. Do others think this is worthwhile or not? Another thought would be to help make up for not being as good as specialist classes would be to give Rangers a basic ability to generate less Threat and even bleed off Threat as they get higher level -- this would represent their training in stealth and ambush.

[Radhruin_EU]

It came up in discussion in-game that maybe a Ranger class that was 50/50 Hunter/Captain would be both viable and lore-friendly.

Not so much... that sounds more like an 'Aragorn' class than a 'Ranger' class and he had the power to heal because of who he was, not because he was a Ranger.

Besides, like I said before it doesn't really matter what slant you try to put on it because the game's story very much assumes player-characters are *not* Rangers. And the Rangers weren't adventurers, either.