So I'm looking at doing a Monster Slayer Ranger, and using the Revised Ranger. However, there's a slight issue.
In the Revised Ranger you get a conclave feature at level 5. This is your extra attack unless you're a beast conclave in which it is your coordinated attack and it balances out as essentially the same thing.
In Xanathar the ranger archetypes don't get anything at level 5, because the PHB ranger gives all rangers extra attack at level 5 in their base rather than in their archetype - unlike in the Revised.
So if you were to do a strict reading of a Revised Ranger using a Xanathar archetype, none of the three subclasses receives anything at level 5.
I'm assuming this wasn't intended and if you're doing a Revised Ranger Monster Slayer, Gloom Stalker, or Horizon Walker you should get extra attack at level 5.
Does that sound right to everyone?
Thanks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
The Revised Ranger from Unearthed Arcana is only meant to be used with the Unearthed Arcana subclasses (conclaves) that are also detailed in Unearthed Arcana.
The new Ranger subclasses in Xanathar's Guide to Everything are meant for the Ranger class from the PHB and are not designed to be compatible with the UA Revised Ranger.
In short, if you want to play a XGtE subclass, but use the UA Revised Ranger, you need to sit down and rebalance the whole thing with your DM to work it out, as it wasn't intended to be done.
That said, I am sure it can be done - if you do this and make some decisions, please let us know what you decided upon as others may find it useful.
As far as I know, the Gloom Stalker in Xanathar's is exactly the same as the Dark Stalker in the Revised Ranger, with the exception of the Extra Attack feature. Same with the Hunter in PHB/Revised. I really don't think there's much to rebalance, beyond the whole "the revised Ranger has never been official" part. Just add Extra Attack at level 5.
The Extra Attack workaround was specifically meant to make a Beast Master without the wonky "sacrifice your attack to let your companion attack" feature from the PHB, which proved unpopular. None of the Xanathar's subclasses have any features that need to be balanced by the loss of an attack, hence how they are balanced with the PHB Ranger.
My reading was that the reason for the Revised Ranger was because "its ranking as D&D’s weakest class by a significant margin" so the PHB ranger and Revised Ranger are not meant to be balanced comparison.
This is oversimplifying, but the two biggest improvements are the Natural Explorer/Primeval Awareness updates (noncombat) and the Favored Enemy updates (combat/noncombat). These improve the class's ability in regards to roleplaying in more situations, utility and value to the party, and also in combat. I understand having a backstory where you're a ranger with familiarity in one type of terrain, but I very much like being more relevant to the campaign more frequently (and also lessening the chance of ranger abilities being irrelevant say if you choose Underdark and your campaign never goes there).
Again to oversimplify, if you want to use the PHB ranger and update the Natural Explorer/Primeval Awareness and Favored Enemy - I think that is a good solution. Additionally, if you want to use the Revised Ranger with the new Xanathar subclasses and just add extra attack at level 5 to them, I think that works too.
Currently, I like to build my characters digitally then print them out for sessions, and then update them later. So it is a slight issue as you can't homebrew classes here on dndbeyond quite yet - however not a huge issue.
But those are my thoughts so far, thanks for the feedback, and looking forward to hearing what anyone else has to say.
FYI, working on a Tabaxi Monster Slayer Ranger who dual wields, hunts werewolves, and is named Bouncy the Wolf Hunter :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
I totally agree with your post, well said. Honestly, I think that WotC have really dropped the ball on the ranger class. The PHB Ranger reads like it was designed by someone who either had never played the class or had a massive grudge against it. Even in its familiar environment against favoured enemy, it is only borderline, and outside of that, markedly weaker than any other class. So they come along with a great revision in 2016 and spend all 2017 umming and ahhing only to back away from it now. Talk about an own goal. I've heard no coherent and plausible explanation from anyone as to why they don't formalise the Revised Ranger (or some tweaked version thereof) and I HAVE read the various tweets from Mr Crawford which sound quite political and purposefully vague. Even IF there is some stuff going on 'behind the scenes' that we mere mortals can't be trusted with, then the sheer length of time it has taken for them to sort out this iconic and important class is unprofessional and quite a shame. ' We pays our money and we wants our ranger'... I can't believe that is such an unreasonable request. Come on WotC- get it right for crying out loud!
In a Sage Advice video on December (here the link), Crawford said that there are many people happy with the PHB ranger. They can't change an official version of a class just because some from the community prefer the Revised version. They are aren't dropping the ball, they have to figure out the best way to make/keep them both official if there is really the need to do that.
Thanks for the link. I had also seen that, and I appreciate that they want to get it right. I however don't understand your view that they 'can't change an official version of a class': They are the holders of the licence, they can do whatever they like, and the preface of the Revised Ranger article of UA in 2016 implied as much! In any case, my primary beef with WotC on this issue is the extraordinary amount of time that it is taking to do it. They've know the PHB version had issues since at least 2015, if not before, and the Revised version was floated end of 2016. It's now Jan 18 and I see nothing happening conclusively anytime soon. So I stand by my criticism that this is unprofessional, and certainly annoying for any of us who would like to play the RR and use it via DDB. Just for context, I love the game and 5e! I honestly don't have any other problems with it at all and certainly nothing to post complaints about...It's just my poor dumb luck to be a ranger lover!
Well, the easiest solution is to just give your Ranger the Extra Attack feature at Level 5, as that is where it "would" land and leave everything else the same. That is how I did my Horizon Walker who is a Revised Ranger.
In terms of Revised Ranger balance, I agree that it has been taking quite a while to get this figured out. The main concern I have is that this balance problem is really only tied to a few traits, and the rest does not need to be touched.
1) Favored X: These are flawed by design. Mechanically, it is not satisfying to have multiple traits in a class that are potentially not usable for multiple play sessions. Each one of these needs addressed within the class to be about how the Ranger can adapt to a setting (Terrain and Targets) and not about being specialized in specific ones. Natural Explorer does a good job of accomplishing this (although I think the combat boosts need to get put into traits later in the class), but Favored Enemies does not.
Potential solutions include being able to switch your Favored Enemy at certain points (long rests, short rests, usage of spell slots, prepared vs known like a spell book etc) or variations of other mechanics to replace the features as a whole.
2) Primeval Awareness: Too much of a grab bag now in Revised, bad use of a spell slot in PHB. Just needs to be some sort of sense that fits thematically that can be used 1 + Wisdom Modifier
3) Foe Slayer: Just a bad capstone. Least of my worries since I rarely bother looking into Level 20 abilities.
4) Beast Conclave: Still not quite the right balance. PHB makes the beast rather useless as the Ranger will almost always do more damage with them taking the extra attack over the beast. Revised makes the beast stronger that the PC, and it feels like the PC is just there to take 1 shot a round while the beast is getting tons of hits in (so the opposite issue). Beast having its own initiative also makes you lose the feeling that the PC and the beast are a singular fighting force. I think the best answer to is to keep some of the boosts (such as hit dice rolling, prof bonus added to AC, attacks, damage, prof in saving throws) but put the beast back onto the Ranger's initiative. I think the beast should be able to attack using the Ranger's bonus action (since Planar Warrior and Slayer's Eye provide a similar damage boost on the same), and the still optional use of Extra Attack for the companion. Put in a few other traits to keep it interesting after that and call it good.
1) Favored X: These are flawed by design. Mechanically, it is not satisfying to have multiple traits in a class that are potentially not usable for multiple play sessions. Each one of these needs addressed within the class to be about how the Ranger can adapt to a setting (Terrain and Targets) and not about being specialized in specific ones. Natural Explorer does a good job of accomplishing this (although I think the combat boosts need to get put into traits later in the class), but Favored Enemies does not.
Potential solutions include being able to switch your Favored Enemy at certain points (long rests, short rests, usage of spell slots, prepared vs known like a spell book etc) or variations of other mechanics to replace the features as a whole.
A friend of mine ruled in a game he was running that the Ranger was allowed to switch his favoured enemy ability after spending a day of preparation and a long rest.
Basically the idea was that the Ranger would be going through information on the quarry he is hunting, weaknesses, maybe gathering natural poisons to add to their weapons or whatever. Think of the way Geralt prepares to hunt monsters in the Witcher series.
1) Favored X: These are flawed by design. Mechanically, it is not satisfying to have multiple traits in a class that are potentially not usable for multiple play sessions. Each one of these needs addressed within the class to be about how the Ranger can adapt to a setting (Terrain and Targets) and not about being specialized in specific ones. Natural Explorer does a good job of accomplishing this (although I think the combat boosts need to get put into traits later in the class), but Favored Enemies does not.
Favored Enemy and Favored Terrain aren't meant to be a Ranger's bread-and-butter; they're there to flesh out your Ranger's backstory and personality. The class has enough features into it to be useful in any situation. The designers even say this explicitly in an article on how to modify classes:
Much of the ranger’s extra potency in combat comes from spells such as hunter’s mark and from the class features granted by the ranger archetypes. The 3rd-level feature in each archetype usually either provides a raw increase in combat power, or grants the ranger greater combat versatility.
Favored Enemy was intentionally designed to provide no combat bonus, because the ranger’s strength in combat should not rely solely on the discretion of the Dungeon Master or the circumstances of the adventure. Although the Hunter archetype’s 3rd-level ability does rely somewhat on the nature of the foes being fought, Favored Enemy is generally useful in the interaction and exploration pillars of the game.
The Revised Ranger version of Favored Enemy was a big step back in my opinion (though I do like the split between "lesser" and "greater" enemy types.)
A friend of mine ruled in a game he was running that the Ranger was allowed to switch his favoured enemy ability after spending a day of preparation and a long rest.
Basically the idea was that the Ranger would be going through information on the quarry he is hunting, weaknesses, maybe gathering natural poisons to add to their weapons or whatever. Think of the way Geralt prepares to hunt monsters in the Witcher series.
That's a pretty cool idea, but I feel it infringes on the Monster Slayer too much.
Since the Revised Ranger gets subclass features at all of the levels that the standard Ranger does (except for level 5, where it's either Multiattack or your beast gets an attack), you can apply any Ranger Conclave to the Revised Ranger.
A little late to the party, but if it helps the UA version of the monster slayer flat out states that if you're playing the revised ranger and choose the conclave, you get extra attack at 5th level
Thanks for the link. I had also seen that, and I appreciate that they want to get it right. I however don't understand your view that they 'can't change an official version of a class': They are the holders of the licence, they can do whatever they like, and the preface of the Revised Ranger article of UA in 2016 implied as much! In any case, my primary beef with WotC on this issue is the extraordinary amount of time that it is taking to do it. They've know the PHB version had issues since at least 2015, if not before, and the Revised version was floated end of 2016. It's now Jan 18 and I see nothing happening conclusively anytime soon. So I stand by my criticism that this is unprofessional, and certainly annoying for any of us who would like to play the RR anduse it via DDB. Just for context, I love the game and 5e! I honestly don't have any other problems with it at all and certainly nothing to post complaints about...It's just my poor dumb luck to be a ranger lover!
There are a lot of players that have no problem with the ranger. They can't just replace it on them. They can't just replace a core class like that because the Players Handbook has to remain the core, evergreen product. It's actually WotC's view that they can't change an official version of a class
It's unfortunate that you're so fond of the revised ranger in its current form, because they've already said that the "alternate class" approach is one they've moved away from. Unless they reverse course, you won't see a more polished version of the 2016 Unearthed Arcana article. Regardless of what that article might have said in it's preface, the preface for Unearthed Arcana as a whole says that everything in Unearthed Arcana is unofficial and subject to change.
It's super-professional-game-designer-y of them to be mindful of their entire player base—not just a vocal minority—and not replace an entire class from the core of the game without a level of mindful and deliberate effort on par with that used to develop all the other classes (i.e. the multi-year D&D Next play test).
I'm as interested in new versions of parts of the ranger as any other player less than entirely satisfied with the current version of the ranger. I'd like to see the next iteration very much. It's still going to be a next iteration of design, not a finished product that we see next.
It's unfortunate that you're so fond of the revised ranger in its current form, because they've already said that the "alternate class" approach is one they've moved away from.
I'm curious if you have a link to this information in regards to the ranger rework? I've been trying to find information on their progress with it for a bit now and have only found quotes stating they are still working on it and have not moved away from it. However I can't find anything past January. I figure you've come across something more recent with this statement and would like to see it.
Will I go re-research stuff I looked up 2 months ago and haven’t thought of since? Probably not. Those are the tough breaks of forum necromancy. I probably read it on Twitter from Mike or Jeremy. I think it was related to some comment about compatibility with the Xanathars ranger archetypes.
Thank you, it looks like they are still doing it but it'll be a list of optional alternative features instead of a class rework. Thank you for responding, I didn't want to make an entire thread just for a curiosity.
This link contains the Monster Slayer subclass for rangers in its UA form and it has a small notation for the UA ranger about adding extra attack at lvl 5.
I also looked around and there is a UA which takes the UA ranger into consideration and contains the UA version of the other two XGTE ranger subclasses:
I'd argue that if you play a UA class. Use its UA subclasses as that makes things easier. Hope this helps! If not OP then maybe someone else interested that finds this thread like I did.
UA material is a draft version for early playtesting; it's better to use the official versions, which have been properly tested and revised. The only thing you need to do to make them work with the revised ranger is assume they have Extra Attack.
This is my first post on D&D Beyond, but I've been a player and a DM for quite some time now.
Lately, the current state of the 5th edition ranger has been bugging me. I've had a few players who are new to D&D want to play Rangers in my games, but with the PHB, the Revised Ranger, and Xanathar's Guide all being needed documents to a degree, I've had a hard time recommending this class to newcomers.
So, I decided to consolidate everything Ranger related into one document. It includes all the tweaks we use at my table to make the Revised Ranger content work with the PHB and Xanathar's Guide, so keep in mind that it isn't just recited exactly - there have been some minor tweaks made to keep the balance and the feel of the class intact.
Hopefully this link can work for all of you. You can download it, print it out, share it around - whatever you would find helpful! I just wanted to share this document with others who might find it useful.
[REDACTED - COPYRIGHT MATERIAL]
Please feel free to let me know if you spot any errors.
One of the issues I have had with Ranger, considering that it is a Divine Spell Caster, is that they are the only one who just "knows" spells. I think it'd fit better thematically if they prepared spells instead, similar to Paladin.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So I'm looking at doing a Monster Slayer Ranger, and using the Revised Ranger. However, there's a slight issue.
In the Revised Ranger you get a conclave feature at level 5. This is your extra attack unless you're a beast conclave in which it is your coordinated attack and it balances out as essentially the same thing.
In Xanathar the ranger archetypes don't get anything at level 5, because the PHB ranger gives all rangers extra attack at level 5 in their base rather than in their archetype - unlike in the Revised.
So if you were to do a strict reading of a Revised Ranger using a Xanathar archetype, none of the three subclasses receives anything at level 5.
I'm assuming this wasn't intended and if you're doing a Revised Ranger Monster Slayer, Gloom Stalker, or Horizon Walker you should get extra attack at level 5.
Does that sound right to everyone?
Thanks.
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
The Revised Ranger from Unearthed Arcana is only meant to be used with the Unearthed Arcana subclasses (conclaves) that are also detailed in Unearthed Arcana.
The new Ranger subclasses in Xanathar's Guide to Everything are meant for the Ranger class from the PHB and are not designed to be compatible with the UA Revised Ranger.
In short, if you want to play a XGtE subclass, but use the UA Revised Ranger, you need to sit down and rebalance the whole thing with your DM to work it out, as it wasn't intended to be done.
That said, I am sure it can be done - if you do this and make some decisions, please let us know what you decided upon as others may find it useful.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
As far as I know, the Gloom Stalker in Xanathar's is exactly the same as the Dark Stalker in the Revised Ranger, with the exception of the Extra Attack feature. Same with the Hunter in PHB/Revised. I really don't think there's much to rebalance, beyond the whole "the revised Ranger has never been official" part. Just add Extra Attack at level 5.
The Extra Attack workaround was specifically meant to make a Beast Master without the wonky "sacrifice your attack to let your companion attack" feature from the PHB, which proved unpopular. None of the Xanathar's subclasses have any features that need to be balanced by the loss of an attack, hence how they are balanced with the PHB Ranger.
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile.
My reading was that the reason for the Revised Ranger was because "its ranking as D&D’s weakest class by a significant margin" so the PHB ranger and Revised Ranger are not meant to be balanced comparison.
This is oversimplifying, but the two biggest improvements are the Natural Explorer/Primeval Awareness updates (noncombat) and the Favored Enemy updates (combat/noncombat). These improve the class's ability in regards to roleplaying in more situations, utility and value to the party, and also in combat. I understand having a backstory where you're a ranger with familiarity in one type of terrain, but I very much like being more relevant to the campaign more frequently (and also lessening the chance of ranger abilities being irrelevant say if you choose Underdark and your campaign never goes there).
Again to oversimplify, if you want to use the PHB ranger and update the Natural Explorer/Primeval Awareness and Favored Enemy - I think that is a good solution. Additionally, if you want to use the Revised Ranger with the new Xanathar subclasses and just add extra attack at level 5 to them, I think that works too.
Currently, I like to build my characters digitally then print them out for sessions, and then update them later. So it is a slight issue as you can't homebrew classes here on dndbeyond quite yet - however not a huge issue.
But those are my thoughts so far, thanks for the feedback, and looking forward to hearing what anyone else has to say.
FYI, working on a Tabaxi Monster Slayer Ranger who dual wields, hunts werewolves, and is named Bouncy the Wolf Hunter :)
Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, not light them for themselves.
Brian,
I totally agree with your post, well said. Honestly, I think that WotC have really dropped the ball on the ranger class. The PHB Ranger reads like it was designed by someone who either had never played the class or had a massive grudge against it. Even in its familiar environment against favoured enemy, it is only borderline, and outside of that, markedly weaker than any other class. So they come along with a great revision in 2016 and spend all 2017 umming and ahhing only to back away from it now. Talk about an own goal. I've heard no coherent and plausible explanation from anyone as to why they don't formalise the Revised Ranger (or some tweaked version thereof) and I HAVE read the various tweets from Mr Crawford which sound quite political and purposefully vague. Even IF there is some stuff going on 'behind the scenes' that we mere mortals can't be trusted with, then the sheer length of time it has taken for them to sort out this iconic and important class is unprofessional and quite a shame. ' We pays our money and we wants our ranger'... I can't believe that is such an unreasonable request. Come on WotC- get it right for crying out loud!
/C
---
Don't be Lawful Evil
#OpenDND
In a Sage Advice video on December (here the link), Crawford said that there are many people happy with the PHB ranger. They can't change an official version of a class just because some from the community prefer the Revised version. They are aren't dropping the ball, they have to figure out the best way to make/keep them both official if there is really the need to do that.
Thanks for the link. I had also seen that, and I appreciate that they want to get it right. I however don't understand your view that they 'can't change an official version of a class': They are the holders of the licence, they can do whatever they like, and the preface of the Revised Ranger article of UA in 2016 implied as much! In any case, my primary beef with WotC on this issue is the extraordinary amount of time that it is taking to do it. They've know the PHB version had issues since at least 2015, if not before, and the Revised version was floated end of 2016. It's now Jan 18 and I see nothing happening conclusively anytime soon. So I stand by my criticism that this is unprofessional, and certainly annoying for any of us who would like to play the RR and use it via DDB. Just for context, I love the game and 5e! I honestly don't have any other problems with it at all and certainly nothing to post complaints about...It's just my poor dumb luck to be a ranger lover!
---
Don't be Lawful Evil
#OpenDND
Well, the easiest solution is to just give your Ranger the Extra Attack feature at Level 5, as that is where it "would" land and leave everything else the same. That is how I did my Horizon Walker who is a Revised Ranger.
In terms of Revised Ranger balance, I agree that it has been taking quite a while to get this figured out. The main concern I have is that this balance problem is really only tied to a few traits, and the rest does not need to be touched.
1) Favored X: These are flawed by design. Mechanically, it is not satisfying to have multiple traits in a class that are potentially not usable for multiple play sessions. Each one of these needs addressed within the class to be about how the Ranger can adapt to a setting (Terrain and Targets) and not about being specialized in specific ones. Natural Explorer does a good job of accomplishing this (although I think the combat boosts need to get put into traits later in the class), but Favored Enemies does not.
Potential solutions include being able to switch your Favored Enemy at certain points (long rests, short rests, usage of spell slots, prepared vs known like a spell book etc) or variations of other mechanics to replace the features as a whole.
2) Primeval Awareness: Too much of a grab bag now in Revised, bad use of a spell slot in PHB. Just needs to be some sort of sense that fits thematically that can be used 1 + Wisdom Modifier
3) Foe Slayer: Just a bad capstone. Least of my worries since I rarely bother looking into Level 20 abilities.
4) Beast Conclave: Still not quite the right balance. PHB makes the beast rather useless as the Ranger will almost always do more damage with them taking the extra attack over the beast. Revised makes the beast stronger that the PC, and it feels like the PC is just there to take 1 shot a round while the beast is getting tons of hits in (so the opposite issue). Beast having its own initiative also makes you lose the feeling that the PC and the beast are a singular fighting force. I think the best answer to is to keep some of the boosts (such as hit dice rolling, prof bonus added to AC, attacks, damage, prof in saving throws) but put the beast back onto the Ranger's initiative. I think the beast should be able to attack using the Ranger's bonus action (since Planar Warrior and Slayer's Eye provide a similar damage boost on the same), and the still optional use of Extra Attack for the companion. Put in a few other traits to keep it interesting after that and call it good.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
The Revised Ranger version of Favored Enemy was a big step back in my opinion (though I do like the split between "lesser" and "greater" enemy types.)
That's a pretty cool idea, but I feel it infringes on the Monster Slayer too much.
Since the Revised Ranger gets subclass features at all of the levels that the standard Ranger does (except for level 5, where it's either Multiattack or your beast gets an attack), you can apply any Ranger Conclave to the Revised Ranger.
A little late to the party, but if it helps the UA version of the monster slayer flat out states that if you're playing the revised ranger and choose the conclave, you get extra attack at 5th level
Will I go re-research stuff I looked up 2 months ago and haven’t thought of since? Probably not. Those are the tough breaks of forum necromancy. I probably read it on Twitter from Mike or Jeremy. I think it was related to some comment about compatibility with the Xanathars ranger archetypes.
Edit: This isn’t the only reference I’ve seen to the change: https://mobile.twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/917887283512012801?s=20 but it’s a start for you.
Thank you, it looks like they are still doing it but it'll be a list of optional alternative features instead of a class rework. Thank you for responding, I didn't want to make an entire thread just for a curiosity.
Probably not that useful since I'm a few months late but for the original question of this thread:
https://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/UAThreeSubclasses.pdf
This link contains the Monster Slayer subclass for rangers in its UA form and it has a small notation for the UA ranger about adding extra attack at lvl 5.
I also looked around and there is a UA which takes the UA ranger into consideration and contains the UA version of the other two XGTE ranger subclasses:
https://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/downloads/2017_01_UA_RangerRogue_0117JCMM.pdf
Edit: After discussing with my group we found this: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/12/01/ranger-using-a-xanathar-subclass-the-revised-ranger-should-i-add-the-extra-attack-at-5th-level/
I'd argue that if you play a UA class. Use its UA subclasses as that makes things easier. Hope this helps! If not OP then maybe someone else interested that finds this thread like I did.
UA material is a draft version for early playtesting; it's better to use the official versions, which have been properly tested and revised. The only thing you need to do to make them work with the revised ranger is assume they have Extra Attack.
Hi everyone,
This is my first post on D&D Beyond, but I've been a player and a DM for quite some time now.
Lately, the current state of the 5th edition ranger has been bugging me. I've had a few players who are new to D&D want to play Rangers in my games, but with the PHB, the Revised Ranger, and Xanathar's Guide all being needed documents to a degree, I've had a hard time recommending this class to newcomers.
So, I decided to consolidate everything Ranger related into one document. It includes all the tweaks we use at my table to make the Revised Ranger content work with the PHB and Xanathar's Guide, so keep in mind that it isn't just recited exactly - there have been some minor tweaks made to keep the balance and the feel of the class intact.
Hopefully this link can work for all of you. You can download it, print it out, share it around - whatever you would find helpful! I just wanted to share this document with others who might find it useful.
[REDACTED - COPYRIGHT MATERIAL]
Please feel free to let me know if you spot any errors.
Happy gaming!
- Polaris
One of the issues I have had with Ranger, considering that it is a Divine Spell Caster, is that they are the only one who just "knows" spells. I think it'd fit better thematically if they prepared spells instead, similar to Paladin.