Is there any way to make favored enemy (humanoid) less restrictive?

So I am working on a new ranger character for a PF game and I want to be a bounty hunter, so I am going to be taking favored enemy (humanoid). The problem is that it requires you to pick a specific race, which means it is flat out impossible to cover even the common humanoid races, let alone all of them. Even if I devote every single favored enemy bonus to a different type of humanoid the vast majority of humanoid enemies would still slip through the cracks.

It just seems damn strange that one can have favored enemy (magical beasts) and have everything covered from Bullettes, to Wyverns, to Remorhaz, to Krakens; yet favored enemy dwarf leaves you clueless about gnomes and favored enemy orc leaves you baffled by hobgoblins.

Is there any way to get around this? Like a feat or archetype or something that lets me take half bonus to other humanoids?

If not, does anyone have any house rule fixes for this issue?

In 5th edition, if you select humanoid as your favored enemy, you pick two subtypes instead of one. That seems like a good place to start, houserule-wise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troacctid

In 5th edition, if you select humanoid as your favored enemy, you pick two subtypes instead of one. That seems like a good place to start, houserule-wise.

---

Hell you could go with 3 and it wouldnt be OP, most people are unaware of how many freakin humanoids there are.

You could ask to treat fugitives from X country as an organization.

True this is practically the opposite of an "organization", but characters are often allowed to take favored enemy (the opposing army) in military campaigns making their FE bonuses apply in 90% of encounters. FE is often viewed as being hatred rather than knowledge based since unlike Knowledge Devotion it isn't tied to skills. Failing that there's always Arcanists which may very well cover more humanoid opponents in your campaign the any specific race.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Talakeal

If not, does anyone have any house rule fixes for this issue?

---

House Rule: When the ranger picks a Favored Enemy category they get to pick three, plus there Wisdom Modifier for the number of types. And for each ranger level they add one more.

So there is no more ''the ranger has carefully studied every single undead type in the know universe'', but more the player gets to pick a handful or so. It works out fairly well in my game. A 4th level ranger with an 18 wisdom gets 10 humanoids (Base 3 +4 Wis +3 level).

I should note that my game is a melting pot of all 100 or so humanoid races, so even a 20th level ranger can't get them all. And if you run a more limited game with just like 12 humanoid races, you might want to cut the number down some.

Though even if you keep the high number, this house rule also stops the ranger from knowing ''all undead'' too, as they have to pick types. It does make for a nice balance. A 5th level ranger can have 11 humanoid enemies, but only gets seven undead ones (base 3+4 Wis).

That would require houseruling in extra subtypes, though. Humanoid is a specific unusual case because every humanoid also has a subtype of elf/orc/dwarf/human/whatever. Something like Undead, on the other hand, only has one common subtype - Incorporeal. So you'd have to add the [zombie] and [skeleton] and [vampire] and [whatever] subtypes to make it work for undead, and appropriate equivalencies for others. Assuming you do so, I can see that sort of houserule working out, but it isn't plug and play by any means.

I've experienced no problems in games where humanoid and outsider were collapsed to be one category and no problems were encountered, for what that's worth. Otherwise picking undead, constructs, aberrations, and the other broad categories is mechanically far superior in general, but this is also something that'll be very campaign specific.

Be careful with giving Favored Enemy to more and more humanoids. You quickly lose the serial killer flavor of the ranger and venture forth into omnicidal maniac territory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Glyphstone

That would require houseruling in extra subtypes,

---

Well, I just ignore all that and say more like ''pick an individual creature of that type''. So you'd pick Undead(Vampire) the same way you pick Humanoid(Dwarf).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Karl Aegis

Be careful with giving Favored Enemy to more and more humanoids. You quickly lose the serial killer flavor of the ranger and venture forth into omnicidal maniac territory.

---

Not really, as they still only can use it against a couple foes at a time. Sure if your in game is like a pea sized planet, like Middle Earth, you can cover all the races at 1st level and just attack everyone. Default D&D has at least 20 humanoid races.

It allows a ranger to be more ranger like, as they can often have at least one favored enemy around. Other then the Sad Ranger: ''are there any orcs around? No? Sigh".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jedipotter

Well, I just ignore all that and say more like ''pick an individual creature of that type''. So you'd pick Undead(Vampire) the same way you pick Humanoid(Dwarf).

---

I guess - though it should be pointed out that Humanoid (Dwarf) is selecting all creatures of the Dwarf subtype, not specifically the Dwarf creature. Which doesn't actually matter for Dwarves, but it does for, say, Humanoid (Reptilian) which covers Kobolds, Lizardfolk, and Troglodytes or (Goblinoid) covering Goblins, Hobgoblins, and Bugbears. So your houserule would actually have Kobold, Lizardfolk, and Troglodyte as different types to select, to keep the Reptilian group example.

Since it's being discussed, though - does your variant treat every single creature/template as individual, or thematic groups? Like, would a Shadow, a Wraith, and an Allip take one specialization or three? Does one specialization cover the Skeleton template and the Skeletal Dragon template? If a ranger has Red Dragons and Skeletons as two different specialization categories, can he double up on bonuses when fighting a Red Skeleton Dragon? Is it even possible to select a template as a specialty (presumably yes because Vampire is one)? Is there actually any answer prepared ahead of time for questions like this, or do you handle stuff like that on a case by case basis?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Glyphstone

I guess - though it should be pointed out that Humanoid (Dwarf) is selecting all creatures of the Dwarf subtype, not specifically the Dwarf creature.

---

Right it is more: Select a single creature of this type. So if you select Humanoid, you can select any one humanoid race.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Glyphstone

Since it's being discussed, though - does your variant treat every single creature/template as individual, or thematic groups? Like, would a Shadow, a Wraith, and an Allip take one specialization or three? Does one specialization cover the Skeleton template and the Skeletal Dragon template? If a ranger has Red Dragons and Skeletons as two different specialization categories, can he double up on bonuses when fighting a Red Skeleton Dragon? Is it even possible to select a template as a specialty (presumably yes because Vampire is one)? Is there actually any answer prepared ahead of time for questions like this, or do you handle stuff like that on a case by case basis?

---

No matter how related, each creature is one pick. You'd need to pick Allip and Shadow and Wraith. A template covers anyone with the template, if it has the skeleton template it counts for skeleton.

I do allow the stacking, so if a ranger has undead skeletons and humanoid orc and is fighting an orc skeleton, they do get double the bonus. It's not only a nice power boost, but it does make sense. And I like giving mundane nice things.It drives me crazy with the mundane stuff like ''only +1 once a day'', yet spellcasters get like 10d6 damage maximized. The stacking is a bit rare.

I really play test things out, so I do have lots of basic FAQ for each houserule. And I do add and update them as new things come up. It does help that I know lots of play tester types who like to ''look for tweaks''.

Collapsing humanoids into one favored enemy group is really not a good idea in most campaign settings. Humanoid creatures are far more common in most campaigns than any other creature type by an enormous margin. While humanoid enemies may not be a problem (the average party slays monsters of all types), any party that actually interacts with the game world will do most of its business with humanoids. This gives the ranger an always-on bonus to Bluff and perception checks, and an always-on bonus to track humanoids.

If you're doing a campaign that is firmly on rails this isn't a big deal, but if you actually do anything in the game world other than clear dungeons, humanoid becomes the obvious best choice if it's collapsed. I like the "choose two" option much more, it doesn't really break the game.

Outsider should be collapsed, though. The whole type (without subtypes) is roughly as useful as picking dragon (maybe worse since dragonblooded creatures seem to count for favored enemy: dragon) -- where humanoids give high level rangers extraordinary lying skills in most situations.

It could be argued that rangers could use a bit of a buff or something, but I don't think it should be by giving them one obvious choice for favored enemy. Humanoid (human) is already very powerful in the majority of campaign settings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mvpmack

Collapsing humanoids into one favored enemy group is really not a good idea in most campaign settings. Humanoid creatures are far more common in most campaigns than any other creature type by an enormous margin. While humanoid enemies may not be a problem (the average party slays monsters of all types), any party that actually interacts with the game world will do most of its business with humanoids. This gives the ranger an always-on bonus to Bluff and perception checks, and an always-on bonus to track humanoids.

---

Huh? Humanoid is actually one of the smaller creature types, thanks to the fact most things interesting abilities that would otherwise qualify are usually Monstrous Humanoids or Aberrations, and the ease at which templates can go from humanoid to something else (again, usually Monstrous Humanoid).

Honestly, I'd just combine it all for sensibility sakes. If FE(Aberration) can cover everything from augmented humans (Elans) to Beholders, to Aboleth, all with vastly different body shapes and psychologies, I don't see why you can't have FE(Humanoid) cover a bunch of things that are relatively similar in shape and thought (Note the 'relative', meaning the gap is small compared to the difference between Ablotehs and Elans).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mvpmack

This gives the ranger an always-on bonus to Bluff and perception checks, and an always-on bonus to track humanoids.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mvpmack

where humanoids give high level rangers extraordinary lying skills in most situations.

---

I don't really see it as much of an issue, seeing as neither Bluff, nor Sense Motive is a class skill for Rangers and CHA is the most likely dump stat for this class, so you will not be very good at bluffing anyway.

Meanwhile stuff like Glibness exists and gives the caster a +30 to Bluff for 10 min/level. And both Bard and Beguiler are much more suited for the role of a face.

You have a better chance with Sense Motive, since it's a WIS based skill, but w/out actual ranks invested, you're still not golden.

Now with the Elf or Gnome substitution levels, that give you bonuses to Hide, Listen, Move Silently, Spot and Survival, the FE bonuses are a lot more useful to the Ranger, albeit not in the social situations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mvpmack

It could be argued that rangers could use a bit of a buff or something, but I don't think it should be by giving them one obvious choice for favored enemy. Humanoid (human) is already very powerful in the majority of campaign settings.

---

Well there's already FE (Arcanists), that is widely considered the best option and Undead and other Sneak Attack-immune types for the Swift Hunter. Also campaign specific options like FE (Humanoid/Elf) or, even better, FE (Servants of Lolth), followed by FE (Abberations) for an Underdark campaign would fall into the category of obvious choices.

And I don't think it's a bad thing. It makes the Ranger's class feature actually useful, instead of pointless most of the time.

@ OP - Ask your DM if you can take a Rival Organization ACF and make it a "Criminal Scum", or "Wanted by Law" or some such. Your bonuses would only work on convicted criminals or those that have a bounty on their head.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Necroticplague

Huh? Humanoid is actually one of the smaller creature types, thanks to the fact most things interesting abilities that would otherwise qualify are usually Monstrous Humanoids or Aberrations, and the ease at which templates can go from humanoid to something else (again, usually Monstrous Humanoid).

Honestly, I'd just combine it all for sensibility sakes. If FE(Aberration) can cover everything from augmented humans (Elans) to Beholders, to Aboleth, all with vastly different body shapes and psychologies, I don't see why you can't have FE(Humanoid) cover a bunch of things that are relatively similar in shape and thought (Note the 'relative', meaning the gap is small compared to the difference between Ablotehs and Elans).

---

^
This. WhiteText

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DEMON

@ OP - Ask your DM if you can take a Rival Organization ACF and make it a "Criminal Scum", or "Wanted by Law" or some such. Your bonuses would only work on convicted criminals or those that have a bounty on their head.

---

I think this is the best solution, if allowed. It matches the bounty hunter feeling and can be applied to both usual interpretations for FE: You either hate criminals of all types so much that you always give your best to beat them (note that this could also justify taking any arbitrary group as FE, so DM approval is important) or you are particularly trained in the typical behaviour patterns of criminals.

Also, since most criminals are humanoid ("monsters" usually are not subject to the law as such), you are effectively selecting a subgroup of humanoids, as required by FE - you simply do not discriminate by type, but some other (probably even more restrictive) category.

Personally, I feel like just giving Rangers favored enemy (everything) is probably fine. It means they can be archers or TWF and not have to worry about the fact that someone who decided to use a two-handed melee weapon will always outdo them in damage, and gives them some neat skill buffs.