|#1nebulaFeb 09, 2007 18:32:52||i've not understood how the studied foe class feature works. you should choose a subtype and a creature as your foe, and the handbook use examples like "lycanthropes/werewolves", but i think it should be "shapechanger/lycanthropes", shouldn't it?|
can someone enlighten me?
|#2emjaysmashFeb 09, 2007 23:14:15||No, I don't think so. I believe it is similar to Favored Enemy or something of that sort. Leaving it "Shapechanger/Lycanthrope" is too broad a category.|
|#3MortepierreFeb 10, 2007 3:19:18||Correct.|
If you could choose Shapechanger, then it would also include creatures such as Doppelganger or Rakshasa, which isn't the purpose. The goal is to narrow it down to a specific category of adversary.
Generally, in RL, don't expect a PrC to give you special power against a broad range of individuals.
|#4nebulaFeb 10, 2007 6:28:59||mmm... i don't know.... one of the merit of rl is (for me) to have kicked away power play, but i think in this way this class is too weak.|
and, thinking about roloplaying a lycanthropes hunter, wouldn't be nice if he, for example, could know a little how to treat a doppleganger, thanks to the experience he has with other shapechangers?
|#5rotipherFeb 10, 2007 15:59:41||Nice for the player, but out of keeping with the setting. Monsters in Ravenloft are supposed to be mysterious, after all, and simple game-mechanics shouldn't summarily override the idea that an expert on Monster X can still be caught off-guard by Monster Y, which he's never even heard of.|
Think of it as having specialized in one of Van Richten's books' topics, rather than in a game-mechanical, OOC category of monsters. Concepts like "monstrous humanoids" or "cold subtype" belong strictly behind the curtain, not out where the PCs can see them.
|#6john_w._mangrumFeb 10, 2007 20:34:48||I assume the monster hunter's studied foe is based on the witch hunter's studied foe in SotDR. In that case, the foe categories were intended to be the same as those of a ranger, but I made them too restrictive due to a misreading of that rule at the time.|
|#7MortepierreFeb 11, 2007 6:54:28||Ranger's special enemy is pretty restrictive as it is John. You can't, for instance, choose simply "outsiders". You have to specify a subcategory. If we applied the same thing to the monster hunter, the guy would be next to useless considering how few fiends exist in RL. I think the categories as outlined in the RLPHB work fine as they are.|
|#8john_w._mangrumFeb 11, 2007 9:14:36|
Ranger's special enemy is pretty restrictive as it is John. You can't, for instance, choose simply "outsiders". You have to specify a subcategory. If we applied the same thing to the monster hunter, the guy would be next to useless considering how few fiends exist in RL. I think the categories as outlined in the RLPHB work fine as they are.
The thing is, the RLPHB categories are A: more restrictive than the PH ranger versions, and B: inconsistently and incoherently explained. In short, the RLPHB doesn't outline categories. It just tosses out some random examples that don't look balanced even at first blush (according to this, my foe options include A: all demons, B: all spellcasting fey, or C: ...werewolves?), then instructs you to check the PH ranger categories for examples (which don't match the examples given here). Plus, it starts out by saying you have to pick a specific creature.
You're right that a ranger can't just take "outsider," though. He'd have to take, as an example, "outsiders (evil)." Another term for that is "all fiends."