Elven Rangers

[RaspK_FOG]

Indeed, I do not remember anything like what is here suggested as "official" Birthright material! As for priests being able to serve an ethos, that was a mistake on your part (or so I think, since I have not yet been given back my 2e books :angry: ), for the generic class was called a cleric, but the individual class was called a priest, much like with the thieves and bards, which belonged to the rogue class... And the standard system was that priests served a deity/power/[whatever], but there could be others who served an ethos, and the druid was one such suggestion: thus, he generally could not serve a deity, except for some campaign settings which specifically mentioned that he did so! And no, while the DM is allowed to tweak things as he see fit, the standard AD&D 2e PHB and DMG suggests that such a setting regularly has a close polytheistic realisation, not an atheistic one!

[irdeggman]

I believe that clerics could serve an ethos but specialty priests (like those in Birthright) could not. This might not have ever been written as such but there were no examples to the contrary - see deities and demigods (2nd ed version) and monsters mythology (I think that was the title) they had a whole lot more detailed examples of speciality priests.

[geeman]

At 02:58 PM 12/19/2003 +0100, RaspK_FOG wrote:



> Indeed, I do not remember anything like what is here suggested as

> "official" Birthright material! As for priests being able

> to serve an ethos, that was a mistake on your part (or so I think, since

> I have not yet been given back my 2e books :angry: ), for the generic

> class was called a cleric, but the individual class was called a priest,

> much like with the thieves and bards, which belonged to the rogue

> class... And the standard system was that priests served a

> deity/power/[whatever], but there could be others who served an ethos,

> and the druid was one such suggestion: thus, he generally could not serve

> a deity, except for some campaign settings which specifically mentioned

> that he did so



If I might step in to quibble a bit... the generic class was actually the

priest, while the cleric was a subset of that class. For the sake of

clarifying this, here`s the relevant text from the 2e PHB:



Under the intro to the Priest: "The priest is a believer and advocate of a

god from a particular mythos."



Under the general "Priest" class, however, there are subclasses:



Cleric: "The most common type of priest is the cleric. The cleric may be

an adherent of any religion (though if the DM designs a specific mythos,

the cleric`s abilities and spells may be changed--see following)."



Under "Priests of Specific Mythoi"



"In the simplest version of the AD&D game, clerics serve religions that can

be generally described as `good` or `evil.` Nothing more needs to be said

about it; the game will play perfectly well at this level. However, a DM

who has taken the time to create a detailed campaign world has often spent

some of that time devising elaborate pantheons, either unique creations or

adaptations from history or literature. If the option is open (and only

your DM can decide), you may want your character to adhere to a particular

mythos, taking advantage of the detail and color you DM has provided. If

your character follows a particular mythos, expect him to have abilities,

spells and restrictions different from the generic cleric."



Under "Priest Titles"



"A priest of nature, for example (especially one based on Western European

tradition) could be called a druid (see below.)



And lastly under the Druid description:



"The druid is an example of a priest designed for a specific mythos. His

powers and beliefs are different from those of the cleric."



Of course, the specific mythos of the druid could just be a general nature

worship, in BR the class is limited to priests of Erik--for all that that

seems to vex the issue of elf nature magic, ad nauseam.



> And no, while the DM is allowed to tweak things as he see fit, the

> standard[ AD&D 2e PHB and DMG suggests that such a setting regularly has

> a close polytheistic realisation, not an atheistic one



I guess that`s generally true, though I don`t recall anything ever that

specific being suggested. It just implies that the mythos can be as

abstract as "good" or "evil" and that gods themselves need not be

included. I don`t think that equates with atheistic, but I wouldn`t rule

it out either.



In the case of BR priests we only had speciality priests. There are no

clerics at all... though we don`t really know for sure about the priests of

various humanoid and dwarven gods. "Shaman" and such for the most part

seems reasonable for the humanoids, but specialty priests of Moradin is the

most likely for dwarves. But there are probably are no "generic" clerics

in the BR materials.



That does not mean, however, that rangers can`t get their spells from a

generic "nature" source rather than from Erik, but there is nothing in the

cant that says rangers are paladins of Erik that I recall reading. Having

said that, I should note that I like the interpretation, but would take it

a step further by adding a "Forester" class (something like the WoT`s

class--that is, without spells) to handle the abilities of woodsmen and

hunters for BR purposes, and I`d tweak the powers of the ranger a bit here

and there to make him more "holy" than the standard 3e/3.5 ranger for a

Birthright D20 text. (Personally, I don`t like that 3.5 rangers have d8

hit dice, for instance. I know the rationale, but I just think it`s a bad

idea. "Fighter" classes should have d10 or better HD IMO.)



Gary

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "irdeggman" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 4:31 AM





> Kenneth usually does a good job of documenting his reasons and sources,

> when applicable, so I was under the belief that he had a source other than

> house-rules to use for the basis of his argument. I still am.



So did I. I could see the text in my mind`s eye, but looking back over the

secion on Erik in the basic rules and the BoP, this must be an idea that

worked its way so deeply into my understanding of the game that I could

actually remember (falsely) reading a canon description of the ranger as a

paladin of Erik.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "RaspK_FOG" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 7:58 AM





> As for priests being able to serve an ethos, that was a mistake on your

> part, for the generic class was called a cleric, but the individual class

was

> called a priest, much like with the thieves and bards, which belonged to

the

> rogue class... And the standard system was that priests served a

> deity/power/[whatever], but there could be others who served an ethos,

> and the druid was one such suggestion: thus, he generally could not serve

a

> deity, except for some campaign settings which specifically mentioned that

he

> did



Having saved all my 2e material like by virtue of having taken the Packrat

feat, I will be plentiful with references. First off the generic class was

called priest, and the cleric was an all around variety with low

requirements and a wide spell list. Specialty priests tended to be harder

to qualify for and had more limited spell lists. The PHB goes on to

describe the druid as an example of a specialty priest "designed for a

specific mythos". The color description mentions that the historical

inspirations saw many things, "the sun, moon, and certain trees as deities."

There is no discussion of forces and deities as alternate sources of spell

power. Deities and demigods certainly provides specific gods for druids,

but its the nature of such a book that it doesn`t do forces properly. The

complete handbook of druids has a section on the subject (chapter 4,

roleplaying druids, section 1 druidic faith). They immediately start off

with a formulaic consideration of both forces and nature gods. The next

headings include "druids who worship gods", and then the place of "nature

and the gods". There is mention that the original settings (as settings)

Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms, and mention Beory, Chauntea, and the

Earthmother. In the list of nature deities, there are description of an

Artemis type, a Demeter type, and a Gaia type. The druid handbook does then

go on to describe nature as Nature, but it has established that this can be

personified as a deity, or abstract as a force. Any alternative would be

clumsy. The complete handbook of priests is mostly a mythos construction

tool, and it contains both force and deity concepts suitable for druids.

Likewise there were forces provided as well as deities for priests. I could

create priests of the force of magic, chaos, the elements, and so on.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Amaranth]

Hello, everyone. New to the boards and this is my first post.

In my own Birthright campaign, where we use the 3E rules, I do allow elven druids and rangers. These two classes are quintissentially elven and it didn&#39;t seem to make sense to me to deny my players the classes they wanted to play when it seemed that reasonable.

Elves need a spiritual organization, and druids are perfect. What I do is have the source of druidic magic be nature itself and not a deity. Some would say that this upsets the balance of power between humans and elves, but I avoid that as well by limiting the number of druids in the elvenlands.

Elven druids in my campaign are very secretive and do not usually interfere in things such as warfare or the like- simply that which pertains to nature. Also, there are only 13 elven druids at one time. Should one die, another is chosen by a special dryad in my campaign. And since sidhelin are immortal, that doesn&#39;t happen often .

Anyway, that is my solution to the elven druid/ranger problem.

[Alluveal]

A ranger in my party (game I am running) will eventually get spells. However, I am not sure what I&#39;ll be doing with this. I would assume elves have rangers, I mean they&#39;re highly protective of their forest areas. That said, in stories I have read, the humans had priestly magic on their side when they first invaded Anuire--something the elves lacked which hindered them.

I am not sure I&#39;m going to give priestly spells to the ranger. I may go through and change some of the spells on the priest list and add a few arcane spells. I want to stay true to the Birthright flavor and keep religion as a non-elf asset. I&#39;ve seen too many pooly run Birthright games where players start building temples in The Sielwode or Tuarhieval without a care in the world, thinking only about power and profit. Makes no sense to me.

Anyway, some ideas here have helped, but until she hits her spell-casting level, I&#39;ve got a little time to think.

[Sir Justine]

Elven druids in my campaign are very secretive and do not usually interfere in things such as warfare or the like- simply that which pertains to nature. Also, there are only 13 elven druids at one time. Should one die, another is chosen by a special dryad in my campaign. And since sidhelin are immortal, that doesn&#39;t happen often.

As I pointed before, that is what I do too - use elven druids. My priests of Erik are clerics with nature-related domains, but druids are an elven thing. A human could become a druid, but it would be an exception.
But I really liked your idea of a dryad choosing the druids

I am not sure I&#39;m going to give priestly spells to the ranger. I may go through and change some of the spells on the priest list and add a few arcane spells. I want to stay true to the Birthright flavor and keep religion as a non-elf asset. I&#39;ve seen too many pooly run Birthright games where players start building temples in The Sielwode or Tuarhieval without a care in the world, thinking only about power and profit. Makes no sense to me.

Well, I agree with this too. IMC elves do not have a "religion" in the sense that they do not have an organized church.
And about your ranger player, is it an elf?
If it is human, I will say it again (though this is, of course, just a suggestion): use a variant without spells&#33;&#33;&#33;
A can see an elven ranger with spells, but for a normal "woodsman" spells are, IMHO, a bad conception.

IMC I use this variant (I made it, though the ideas in it aren&#39;t original):

"Stalker"
BAB: Good (as fighter)
HD: d8
Fort: Good (+2 at 1st level)
Ref: Average (or Good, if you don&#39;t use the progression that starts with +1 and ends with +9)
Will: Weak (+0 at 1st level)

Skills Points: 6
Weapon and Armor Proficiences: Simple and Martial weapons, Light and Medium armors, and shields (though not with tower shields).

Class Features:
1 Favored enemy, Track, wild empathy
2 Bonus feat
3 Favored terrain
4 Animal companion
5 Favored enemy, open track
6 Bonus feat
7 Favored terrain
8 -
9 Fast track
10 Bonus feat, favored enemy
11 Favored terrain
12 -
13 Hide track
14 Bonus feat
15 Favored enemy, favored terrain
16 -
17 Traceless track
18 Bonus feat
19 Favored terrain
20 Favored enemy

Favored enemy, Track, wild empathy, and animal companion: As the ranger of the PHB.

Favored Terrain (Ex): At 3rd level, a stalker may select a type of terrain from among the following options: aquatic, desert, forest, hills, marsh, mountain, or plains. The stalker gains a +2 bonus on Hide, Knowledge (nature), Listen, Move Silently, Spot, and Survival checks when using these skills in the terrain of this type. Likewise, the stalker gets a +2 dodge bonus to Armor Class when he is in this type of terrain.
At 7th level and every four levels thereafter (11th, 15th, and 19th level), the stalker may select an additional favored terrain from those given above. In addition, at each such interval, the bonus of any favored terrain (including the one just selected, if so desired) increases by 2.

Open Track (Ex): At 5th level, a stalker gains the ability to travel faster through difficult terrain. The stalker reduces the movement penalty of the terrain by 1/4. For example, the movement penalty for traveling through a trackless forest would pass from 1/2 to 3/4, and for mountains with highways from 3/4 to 1. You can guide a group of up to one person per level, reducing their movement penalty as well as you reduce your own.

Fast Track (Ex): Beginning at 9th level, a stalker can move at his normal speed while following tracks without taking the normal –5 penalty. He takes only a –10 penalty (instead of the normal –20) when moving at up to twice normal speed while tracking.

Hide Track (Ex): At 13th level, a stalker gains the ability to hide the trails of a group of up to one person per level while moving at his normal speed.

Traceless Track (Su): Beginning at 17th level, a stalker can track a creature moving under the influence of pass without trace or a similar effect, though he suffers a -10 circumstance penalty on his Survival check.

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Amaranth@Jan 17 2004, 02:33 PM

Elves need a spiritual organization, and druids are perfect. What I do is have the source of druidic magic be nature itself and not a deity. Some would say that this upsets the balance of power between humans and elves, but I avoid that as well by limiting the number of druids in the elvenlands.

Why? Cerilian elves by their very nature are at opposition to organizations. They tend to be chaotic and shun lawful alignments, which reflects their strong independent nature.

This puts them in opposition to organizations in general. Most of the writings depict elven &#39;spirituality&#39; as a very personal thing not on an organizational framework.

This independence and the fact that they are immortal tends to remove them from any sort of deity/over reaching spiritual heirarchy.

Sometimes we have our own personal concept of things, like how elves should behave, override what the designers had envisioned for them. Cerilian races are different than their counterparts in other settings, this is one of the differences. An equivalent example is the Dark Sun elf. Whereas in most settings elves tend to be nature oriented in Dark Sun they are greedy and driven by that. A Dark Sun elf would defile the land in a minute if there was a profit to be made by doing so where a Cerilian one would probably kill anyone (including and elf) that harmed the forests.

[Alluveal]

Well first off, I&#39;m using 2nd edition rules, so no feats, etc. Second, there are not elven druids in the game, so that&#39;s not really an option. They have magic / sorcery. That&#39;s their bread and butter so to say. I think I&#39;ll look at some of the druid spells though, and see if I can alter them or only choose ones that aren&#39;t too "goddish" or "divine" in nature. The ranger is an elf--fully and wholly.