Tracking

[Saeviomagy]

Yes because at this point the only reason to be a ranger is to be the best at two weapon fighting or archery.

Oh noes! There are other classes with stealth and thievery on their lists too! We're all doomed!

Really - this isn't a bad thing.

Add to that the fact that the ranger gets mileage out of wisdom that the rogue does not, and the ranger is much more likely to be the most perceptive member of the party.

Finally the fact that the ranger gets nature and the rogue gets dungeoneering further seperates out the two roles. The fact that when one finds tracks the other can come over and tell them what the tracks are from also helps the game significantly.

 

[Prophet2b]

There are actually multiple ways that one could handle this, which I think is awesome.

For example, one group could decide that they just want to use Perception for tracking and that's it. You track by rolling a Perception check.

Others have suggested skill encounters, basically.

I would probably do a mix. All the Perception check tells you is how to find tracks. I can do that. I can go outside and see deer tracks. Now, just because you find a set of tracks doesn't mean you know what those are, and I would require a separate (appropriate knowledge) roll in order to determine that.

Tracking is something else entirely. I can spot deer tracks, but that doesn't mean that I can find the deer. It's not as simple as just following some tracks in the mud. What about if the deer makes its way onto a rocky hill where there are no impressions in the ground? What about a stream bed? What if a different deer's tracks get mingled with the one I was looking for? Tracking is a systematic (and tricky) endeavor that I would require a skilled encounter to handle - and the ranger's skills would likely be the best at accomplishing this.

I love the flexibility in determining how things are handled. A new group to roleplaying will probably handle it the most simple way (a Perception check). A more seasoned group can find fun and more challenging/realistic ways to handle these situations (or do it the easy, if they like). I love it.

As for non-combat abilities, I really like that WotC didn't touch that so much. For now, non-combat abilities are basically left up to skills, and that's where I think they ought to stay. I don't want them telling me what a character can and can't do based on at-will, encounter, and per day abilities that are outside of combat. There's quite a bit in the PHB already. I really don't want them touching even more. I'm sure that eventually they will - but for now, I like it the way it is.

If some don't, well, then some don't. But that certainly isn't a flaw in the system. It's just preference.

 

[DdraigGoch]

Tracking "in RL" is broken into two pretty distinct peices.

Track & Sign
-This is largely an issue of identification.
-What animal does that track/nest/rubbing tree/feeding site/feces/etc belong to?
-What gender is the animal?
-What exactly was the animal doing when it made the track in question?
-What gait? -What direction was it looking? etc
-Track & Sign identification is an issue of knowledge skills, not of perception checks. This should really be covered by nature/arcana/dungeoneering/religion.

Trailing
-This is actually what D&D is usually talking about when they discuss tracking, the actual act of following spoor (tracks and signs) to the creature that made them.
-Part of trailing is definetly perception skills but I am not comfortable saying it is JUST perception. A HUGE part of trailing is your understanding of the creature you are following. There are always plenty of times when there are NO tracks, you have to rely on understanding of behaviour and your instincts to make educated guesses.

I think, overall, trailing should really be a skill challenge. If you just want to check out a spoor and find out what happened, there is no reason to make more than one knowledge check. If you want to find spoor, indentify it, follow the trail through possibly dense and varied terrain, leading to intelligent or magical quarry... skill challenge time.

Knowledges, perception, insight, endurance and even streetwise make sense.

 

[breschau]

Finding tracks is described in the Perception skill, a skill only the Ranger (and the Rogue) got on their Class Skill list.

So without a class feature, class feat, or any other mechanical bit associated with the ranger, any character trained in Perception is just as good at tracking as the ranger? So my wizard can take Skill Training (Perception) and be just as good? Nice. Score one for the other side.

 

[Vempyre]

So without a class feature, class feat, or any other mechanical bit associated with the ranger, any character trained in Perception is just as good at tracking as the ranger? So my wizard can take Skill Training (Perception) and be just as good? Nice. Score one for the other side.

Yes, and why not? The wizards did have to take a skill training feat and boost the appropriate stat to be as good as the ranger. Ppl could do the same in 3E.

 

[Cadfan]

So without a class feature, class feat, or any other mechanical bit associated with the ranger, any character trained in Perception is just as good at tracking as the ranger? So my wizard can take Skill Training (Perception) and be just as good? Nice. Score one for the other side.

Actually, the ranger has Nature, and the ranger has Wisdom as a very important secondary stat. So he's likely to 1. know what he's tracking, and 2. be better at getting there.

 

[dagger]

So he's likely to 1. know what he's tracking, and 2. be better at getting there.

"likely" is not supported by the rules.

 

[Saeviomagy]

"likely" is not supported by the rules.

He did actually point out the rules that said that it was more likely.

 

[small pumpkin man]

So without a class feature, class feat, or any other mechanical bit associated with the ranger, any character trained in Perception is just as good at tracking as the ranger? So my wizard can take Skill Training (Perception) and be just as good? Nice. Score one for the other side.

Uhm, wot? Options are bad? Versitility is the "other side"? How is the capacity for other classes to get tracking a bad thing?

Ranger is the only class to have the two appropriate tracking skills as class skills, and have the appropriate ability score as a "key" ability. This means it's very easy to make a good Ranger Tracker, and under normal circumstances, the Ranger will be the best tracker in the party.

Other classes can also become good trackers with appropriate training, or "feats", as they should.

Sure, some Rogue style utility powers would be nice but it's not exactly a hole in the ruleset.

 

[dagger]

He did actually point out the rules that said that it was more likely.

So the only reason to go ranger is to be the best two weapon fighter or archer?