Talk:Favored enemy

Archives

Archive 1

Pre-epic alternatives

Recent edit:

The following clause was judgemental rather than factual "there is usually a lack of worthwhile alternatives at pre-epic levels."

Edited this to be more specific and factual, "at pre-epic levels this is limited to curse song (harper only) and greater spell focus, (only if the character already has spell focus in a chosen school.)"  I hope I have managed to preserve the original intent of the note.

Added note specific to gnomes who are automatically eligible to use this feat to trade for greater focus illusion as early as 1st level.

Any wizard or sorcerer who has spell focus can take a single level of ranger to gain greater focus, martial weapon, medium armor and shield proficiencies, dual weild, access to animal empathy skill.

Choosing greater spell focus this way represents a free metaspell feat for both sorcerers and wizards who can achieve their maximum number of bonus feats in their respective classes, even with the inclusion of one level of ranger. At the very least, this constitutes a "worthwhile alternative" to a single favoured enemy. Unsubscribed from email feedback (talk) 18:00, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

• The edit cited was not recent and was a negotiation from the discussion here. The gnome aspect of greater spell focus only applies to ranger FEs, as Harper Scout does not allow for such a substitution. There are many builds that take a single ranger for various purposes including qualifying for shadowdancer, and most HS character builds tend to take the bonus feats epic to chose something more worthwhile. Nevertheless a level 40 gnome pure ranger without any FEs is a wasted opportunity. The ranger spellbook does not find ample opportunity for a large number of greater spell focuses, so at some point a nearly pure ranger will find a lack a worthwhile alternatives to favored enemy. Once a build reaches ten ranger levels before epic levels it typically will start taking favored enemy if it hasn't already. While your observation of substitution for greater spell focus do well to apply to the level 1 and 5 feats of the ranger, later ranger feats hold to the reverse.

The biggest issue is in considering whether favored enemy is intrinsic to the ranger and Harper Scout class, or whether it is just a supplemental bonus feat. Game documentation sides to the former, while power builds that crave the multiclass benefits of a few levels will side to the latter. If favored enemy is thought of in terms of a ranger build, it is fully worthwhile to take at some point. If it is thought of as just an add on, then it hardly shapes the build as a whole as the feat is class dependent in its potency. WhiZard (talk) 21:19, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, the latest copy is better. Just as factual and stays on topic more strictly.

Of course pure rangers haven't any need for greater spell focus, unless a ranger wanted an entangle (transmutation) or grease (conjuration) spell with a higher DC at 1st level. Would seem a trivial possibility for the power gamer building for level 40, but in a level restricted world, or if the player just wanted their ranger to have more magical affinity than hate it might be desirable.

If there were an issue here, it might be what we would mean by a "worthwhile" feat. It would rely completely on player intention and preference. Best to keep such editorializing in talk, hence my recent edit.

Not sure which game documentation you refer to. The Neverwinter Nights Online manual with such statements as, "Their (rangers') martial skill is nearly the equal of a fighter, but they lack the latters dedication to the craft of fighting," is a document better ignored than discussed. Rather than a blueprint for the game, it reads like a hastily prepared afterthought. Fortunately, this wiki succeeds in so many areas where the documentation fails. ~~Pigron (June 9th, 2013)

• Game documentation includes the in-game descriptions for ranger and Harper scout (which list "favored enemy" instead of "bonus feat" for the first level and every five levels) and the in-game feat description which states "the ranger may choose additional favored enemies every five levels." These descriptions of feat offerings are in synchronization with the description of when the bonus improves. If you look at the above discussions on this talk page you will see multiple requests for clarification by those who were expecting the two to coincide. WhiZard (talk) 21:47, June 10, 2013 (UTC)

• What I see in the previous discussions is a single (not multiple) request for clarification (now archived at FE from epic ranger bonus feats), which was made by someone who was wondering (not expecting) if the two coincided, and which was asking about a correspondence between the bonus and the number of favored enemies taken (not the number of times favored enemy could be chosen).

I can understand people jumping to conclusions about this, but the indicators are not as strong as you make them out to be. --The Krit (talk) 13:31, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

• The second is from the section "stacking" in which someone asked if taking favored enemy from two different classes added to the bonus. If you read the statement I had written it specifically keyed in to the number of favorite enemies versus the bonus, rather than the number of opportunities. Pigron was specifically asking about what "game documentation" meant in the statement I had made in the article. Note also that "may" (used by feat description, not in the paragraph I wrote) often means that the game forces the favorable route when obvious, for example one cannot opt to take no feat at all on the levels the game description allocates for favored enemy.WhiZard (talk) 18:55, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

• Stacking is a separate issue. In fact, that question managed to avoid mentioning taking favored enemy at all. That question asked if a Ranger 1 / HS 1 would get a +2 bonus against any favored enemies the character happened to have. No mention of having two favored enemies. No mention of having two opportunities to choose favored enemies. In fact, the question could have been written by someone who fully understood that the bonus depends solely on class level. --The Krit (talk) 22:16, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

• One quick thing to point out: The bulk of the above argument against saying there is "usually" a lack of worthwhile alternatives (looking at just the initial comment) consists of pointing out worthwhile alternatives in unusual cases. That fails to deliver a contradiction. (It was fully intentional that the statement did not cover all cases.) Just something to keep in mind in the future. ;) --The Krit (talk) 23:35, June 10, 2013 (UTC)

Bonus linked to offerings?

"Game documentation implies that the number of times favored enemy is offered corresponds with the bonus;"

Which documentation / where is it? I know people have come to that conclusion, but at the moment I cannot think of how it could have been implied by game documentation. (Sure it's not a inference instead?) Also, was "offered" supposed to be "taken"? Hmm... even if true, it doesn't seem to add anything to the article. I think I'll try taking it out for now. --The Krit (talk) 00:08, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

Look two posts up where I cited the in game display for the ranger description the Harper scout description, and the feat description. The feat description uses the term "may choose" for which I used the synonym "is offered". WhiZard (talk) 01:13, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

• That is an inference, not an implication. One thing happens every fifth level. A different thing happens also every fifth level. There is an implication that they happen at the same time, but not that there is a correspondence between them. If one of them turns out to be on a different schedule, the implication does not suggest the other is also on the different schedule. An inference (conclusion/expectation drawn by the reader, not made by the writer) could cause one to conclude that there is a correspondence, but it is not something actually in the game documentation. --The Krit (talk) 13:14, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

NPC favored enemy

Just so this has explicit documentation I tested both LevelUpHenchman() and the Toolset feat selection before adding the note about NPCs using hit dice rather than a class level. I think the game just assumes that if it is an NPC, then looking at the level progression doesn't make sense. WhiZard (talk) 01:13, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

• Quite thorough of you. --The Krit (talk) 13:33, July 6, 2013 (UTC)