I don't know if this will help you in your idea of having a dwarven ranger or not, but remember that there was some ground breaking work in this field. Remember that dark elf that was listed in the dark elf trilogy? Yes, I'm talking about drizzt now. Although we may view him as a NPC, he is the epitome of the player character. He started off as a fighter and eventually class changed into a ranger. Why is that? Because of his world views. If you had read the series, you would realize that his views changed slightly from the first book until the last. But he was by no means a standard dark elf anywhere in the series. Yes, he could kill, but he preferred not to do so. Remember the many fights he had with Entreri? How many times did he kill him? There are many other examples in this series alone.

A player character is the exception rather than the rule. I don't believe that they should be short changed because their race gets a longer life. Maybe they have this longer life because they don't go out adventuring. That was brought up in the 1st edition rule books. It's said that they are not penalized for XP, because they are learning at the same rate as other player races. How long do you think normal characters will last against dragons and demi-gods? There is a limit to how high a level a character can go. Otherwise they will become so powerful that they will become a power unto themselves. If you have read the deities & demigods book that was in the 1st edition and probably the 2nd as well (not sure as I never really used that one) it states that when a character gets to a demigod status, they become a NPC. Does it matter how old they are when this happens. NO. They are no longer considered whatever race they are. They are still associated with the race, but they are recognized as something much more than that. You just have to follow what works for you, and change whatever doesn't work for you to fit your ideal. That's all. Period.

Drizzt Do'Urden is, literally, one in a million. It's very hard to go against your own nature. He's not just an exception, he's an oddity. Surely you agree that once you take on a role you have to play it out - you can't say you're a Drow and then go around helping the innocent, or play a dwarf that dreams one day of flying, or run around as a chaotic evil gnome berserker. Player characters might be slightly different from the rest of their kind, but they still belong to a race, which means that they think and act in a certain way. And yes, of course there's a limit to how far a character can go. Above the twentieth level, the rewards for progression become few and far between. The books state that "When characters reach the level where adventures are no longer a challenge, the dungeon master should encouraged the player to retire them. Retired characters enter a 'semi-NPC' state. The character sheets and all pertinent information are entrusted to the DM's care." My suggestion for higher EP requirements might have contradicted 1st ed, but 3rd ed also contradicts 2nd ed. I was only offering an alternative to racial level limits, not threatening to destroy the world, so calm down. You can't have your cake and eat it too, or humans will become a redundant race - AD&D may be a roleplaying game, but it's still a game, and people don't want to be at a direct disadvantage to everyone else.

I was just pointing out that alternative was not needed. I wasn't saying that you were threatening to destroy any world. LOL. I'm just saying that you are getting way too carried away with this. I mean the game is based on fantasy. You don't have to make it concrete. A certain level of detail is necessary, but to go beyond that is rather ludicrous.

Mate, I didn't see the words 'You're getting carried away'; I saw a post that pretty much contradicted what you said earlier about roleplaying. I'm trying to have a discussion and justify what I say as I go, that's what this board is for. Are there rules for AD&D? Yes - so they're debatable, just like everything else. Write a novel if you want a completely flexible world where anything can happen, but wherever there are rules, there'll be guidelines. I'll be totally blunt, I've got no idea what you're trying to say anymore. Let's just leave it at this, hmm?
'That's all. Period.'

I'm gonna have to agree with you there, because I really don't understand what you are trying to say anymore either. To make a good campaign, sometimes you have to create enough background to make a good novel though. I've created many of them that worked very well together. I guess the main problem with our differences is that I am viewing everything from the viewpoint of a DM whereas you are viewing things as a player. I humbly bow out of this discussion.

I'm not sure what Tobbin is trying to say either. I do understand that if AD&D 3rd has gone the way of Ultima Online it's bad. It's not going to be interesting. None of our debates on what the best party is, what the best class is, whether a fighter can beat a mage in a duel, when to dual class, are going to have a place in a 3rd edition where everyone can be everything and everyone is different. I'm sure it's not the case that is complete anarchy but it certainly will take out the number crunching that we can do now for fun. It'd be as though they changed it so that instead of a long sword doing 1-8 damage + a particular thaco, long swords did all sorts of damages. 1-5, 2-6, weird exponential functions, depending on the long sword, and no long sword necessarily doing damage based on an 8 side die. You would then no longer be able to compare long swords to long swords or long swords to other weapons. This is half the fun of the game.

Just to get a sense of perspective here, how many of us have actually seen 3rd ed? I'm quite curious about it after reading all the posts above and don't quite know what to believe. All i've heard is rumor and thirdhand stuff.

In any case I'm sure that most PnP DMs will simply change whatever they don't want about it anyway! CRPGs are a different story, you HAVE to follow standard rules so I wouldn't mind someone giving us a quick summary of 3rd ed from the PH and DMH, NOT what they've heard/read/been told.

I have the 3rd edition handbooks, but am still sorting over it. There have been numerous changes. It's true that characters are more skill based now. Humans get extra skills to start off (4) and an extra feat. They are not penalized xp when multi-classing. The demihumans are not penalized in their favoured class, but will be penalized in any other class (This to be effective if over 2 levels in difference to the first). The character can not have 3 classes or more to start off with. Also, if you have two classes assigned to the character, they are not at 1st level, they are at 1/2 level in each class and must gain 2nd level in order to get 1st level. Combat has totally changed too. The AC rating starts from 0 and goes up now, so you will not see -AC anymore. It is based off of the protection of the armor + adjustments. Gaining levels has become standardized. This is just a couple of things. I will add more in a little bit, I am at work and can't type too much.

i havent read this entire thread but i know you can see what chars would look like in 3rd ed rules.Put the first cd in and install the char genrater. it goes by 3rd ed rules.You can have a darven ranger on that programm. dont know if it would help you guys our not. i really dont understand the rules i just like fansty so thats why i got the game.

Okay, kids, get your paper and pencils out and prepare to take notes.

3rd editions rules in the players handbook has changes in it. All races CAN be everything, BUT it also says that some races are better for certain classes. Thus the handicap when it comes to multiclassing. At the end of each description, it tells which races make better examples for that class. IE the Paladin is good for humans, some elves, but dwarfs and Orcs . . . you have to have a great story behind it and a very understanding DM. In the DM guide it talks about keeping the races and classes real and more importantly, which parties to allow and not allow. Keep the adventure with a variety of classes and skills, etc. The Feats and Skills are just added proficencies to help with your dex rolls or wisdom rolls or con rolls. There will be no 5 types of saving rolls. If it something you can dodge, do a dex roll. If it something that affects your mind, do a wisdom roll. If it is some magic that affects your body, do a con roll. The hardest part for the player is to keep all the pluses straight. Your base dex bonus + any other skills (ie dodge) + 1d20 has to be greater than or equal to whatever the to roll for the movement. Say there is a boulder coming down your mountain path that needs a 20 to dodge. You have a dex of 17. I think that is a +3 plus a dodge skill +8. So, you have 1d20+3+8 that needs to be equal to or greater than 17.

The other change is armor class and THAC0. AC is going to be going from 0 on up. You get bonuses for level, dex, skills, and feats. Instead of THAC0, you now have to hit rolls where you take your 1d20 plus strength bonus plus weapon plus skills and that has to be higher than the enemies AC.

This has gotten a lot harder to initially figure out whether or not you hit the opponent or not, but once you get past the initial rolling and placing of skills ect, it makes a lot more sense. One of those things that makes more sense the more you do it.

Any questions, consult your players handbook.

BK