Talk:Ranger, LotR (3.5e Class)
From D&D Wiki
Not just LotR[edit]
The amazing things about CS's is that their information is not just available in the CS, but throughout all D&D games. CS's bring a lot of new things to Homebrew places around D&D Wiki, and that is why they really help D&D Wiki. However, when something is CS specific or is never linked to other than by the CS it is not helpful. This is one case of that. This material is only linked to from LotR and not from DnD Classes. It really should become a variant ranger on DnD Classes as well as something made for LotR. All your creatures do a perfect example of this — your other LotR material should follow suit. --Green Dragon 23:59, 1 October 2007 (MDT)
Rating[edit]
Formatting - 3/5: I give this a 3 out of 5 on formatting because it uses an old style table (see preload for the correct modern table), does not include the class skills or HD in the table, does not have enough links to the SRD, and does not link to the class feature from the table. --Green Dragon 01:03, 24 February 2008 (MST)
Rating[edit]
Power - 3/5 I give this class a 3 out of 5 because it's really just a copy/paste of the standard SRD 3.5 Ranger, which isn't terribly powerful. I'd give the same rating to the SRD Ranger. --Zieu 13:53, 2 September 2010 (MDT)
Wording - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because it's the SRD wording, which is pretty clear for the most part. --Zieu 13:53, 2 September 2010 (MDT)
Formatting - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because all the tables, although unoriginal, are what I'd expect from standard SRD material and the information is (mostly) all there and easy to access. --Zieu 13:53, 2 September 2010 (MDT)
Flavor - 0/5 I give this class a 0 out of 5 because there is virtually no original content here that I can pick up on, with the notable exception of the title and legal disclaimer at the bottom. Maybe if I scanned through it word by word I'd find something not copy-pasted from the SRD Ranger page, but it would most likely be an extra letter "V" from when the author pressed Shift+V instead of Ctrl+V when "creating" this page. I think this page is redundant and should be removed unless some form of original content is applied/created. --Zieu 13:53, 2 September 2010 (MDT)
