Natural Explorer doubles your proficiency in wisdom and intelligence skills that you are proficient with when related to your favored terrain. It does not give you advantage on rolls. It does not help if you are not proficient in a skill. It does not help in straight wisdom and intelligence checks because those are not skills you are proficient with.
My ranger was proficient in athletics, intimidation (soldier background), and stealth. So Natural Explorer only helped with survival, investigation, and perception when related to certain terrains. If the Tasha's options were out back when I played the ranger, I would have preferred Deft Explorer.
There is also Tool proficiencies. Its less reliable but sometimes a dm will allow a tool when Puzzle solving or gathering information in place of a general check.
Side note: Favored enemy allows advantage even if not proficient in intelligence checks .
Not only do Tool Proficiencies potentially count as well. If one were to get into the tool proficiency materials from Xanathar's there can be clues and ideas for several ways to use them for Natural Explorer and a whole lot of very useful ways to use it outside of Natural Explorer. I really recommend that people take a look at it. There is all kinds of value to it. Like Brewers being able to make various kinds of healing potions if they just have a little time. At least a couple of basic ones a weak.
And that's just one exmple of general usage. But Natural Explorer specific could be that any ranger with Natural Explorer could percieve and understand the secret message in a painting with a forest and castle motif if Forest is a favored Terrain that many people aren't going to realize.
Xanathar's actually does a fair bit to enhance the exploration and environmental parts of the game that I recommend All DM's read a few times over and Players at least have a passing familiarity with.
I am sorry but claiming "with Natural Explorer [you] could percieve and understand the secret message in a painting with a forest and castle motif if Forest is a favored Terrain" is a ludicrous claim. Also saying "there can be clues and ideas for several ways to use [tools] for Natural Explorer" makes no sense. How are you connecting tools to NE?
it's ludicrous to you. But then we're aware your rather against most anything to do with Natural Explorer.
Natural Explorer doubles your proficiency in wisdom and intelligence skills that you are proficient with when related to your favored terrain. It does not give you advantage on rolls. It does not help if you are not proficient in a skill. It does not help in straight wisdom and intelligence checks because those are not skills you are proficient with.
My ranger was proficient in athletics, intimidation (soldier background), and stealth. So Natural Explorer only helped with survival, investigation, and perception when related to certain terrains. If the Tasha's options were out back when I played the ranger, I would have preferred Deft Explorer.
There is also Tool proficiencies. Its less reliable but sometimes a dm will allow a tool when Puzzle solving or gathering information in place of a general check.
Side note: Favored enemy allows advantage even if not proficient in intelligence checks .
Not only do Tool Proficiencies potentially count as well. If one were to get into the tool proficiency materials from Xanathar's there can be clues and ideas for several ways to use them for Natural Explorer and a whole lot of very useful ways to use it outside of Natural Explorer. I really recommend that people take a look at it. There is all kinds of value to it. Like Brewers being able to make various kinds of healing potions if they just have a little time. At least a couple of basic ones a weak.
And that's just one exmple of general usage. But Natural Explorer specific could be that any ranger with Natural Explorer could percieve and understand the secret message in a painting with a forest and castle motif if Forest is a favored Terrain that many people aren't going to realize.
Xanathar's actually does a fair bit to enhance the exploration and environmental parts of the game that I recommend All DM's read a few times over and Players at least have a passing familiarity with.
I am sorry but claiming "with Natural Explorer [you] could percieve and understand the secret message in a painting with a forest and castle motif if Forest is a favored Terrain" is a ludicrous claim. Also saying "there can be clues and ideas for several ways to use [tools] for Natural Explorer" makes no sense. How are you connecting tools to NE?
A ranger with FT in forest would naturally be drawn to issues that look unnatural or forced. leaves that make an odd symbol or letter. Objects out of place signaling significant locations or plants never found in the area. Remember all it needs is a reason you might have a better chance than an unstudied person. There is still a chance of a bad roll meaning it might still fail depending on the difficulty.
As for tools and NE how about a brewer and a specific wine made from flowers that only grow in one region. or a wine made with a drop of venom from a local creature or mushroom.(yes they really exist)
I do not think the examples above are far fetched at all. There may be times when it won't work but there are times when it should. The problem occurs when dms (or players) never consider the implication of such features. That is why I think PHB ranger is A vital inclusion in 5e. It both forces players to think tactically and plan but it also forces out of the box creativity. this is good for both players and dms in the long run.
Natural Explorer doubles your proficiency in wisdom and intelligence skills that you are proficient with when related to your favored terrain. It does not give you advantage on rolls. It does not help if you are not proficient in a skill. It does not help in straight wisdom and intelligence checks because those are not skills you are proficient with.
My ranger was proficient in athletics, intimidation (soldier background), and stealth. So Natural Explorer only helped with survival, investigation, and perception when related to certain terrains. If the Tasha's options were out back when I played the ranger, I would have preferred Deft Explorer.
There is also Tool proficiencies. Its less reliable but sometimes a dm will allow a tool when Puzzle solving or gathering information in place of a general check.
Side note: Favored enemy allows advantage even if not proficient in intelligence checks .
Not only do Tool Proficiencies potentially count as well. If one were to get into the tool proficiency materials from Xanathar's there can be clues and ideas for several ways to use them for Natural Explorer and a whole lot of very useful ways to use it outside of Natural Explorer. I really recommend that people take a look at it. There is all kinds of value to it. Like Brewers being able to make various kinds of healing potions if they just have a little time. At least a couple of basic ones a weak.
And that's just one exmple of general usage. But Natural Explorer specific could be that any ranger with Natural Explorer could percieve and understand the secret message in a painting with a forest and castle motif if Forest is a favored Terrain that many people aren't going to realize.
Xanathar's actually does a fair bit to enhance the exploration and environmental parts of the game that I recommend All DM's read a few times over and Players at least have a passing familiarity with.
I am sorry but claiming "with Natural Explorer [you] could percieve and understand the secret message in a painting with a forest and castle motif if Forest is a favored Terrain" is a ludicrous claim. Also saying "there can be clues and ideas for several ways to use [tools] for Natural Explorer" makes no sense. How are you connecting tools to NE?
it's ludicrous to you. But then we're aware your rather against most anything to do with Natural Explorer.
lol, not against it, I just think some of the things I am seeing people claim are really outside the scope.
Ok, pretend I am your DM, explain to me how your favored terrain being the forest helps you analyze a painting of a castle in a forest for hidden messages?
Natural Explorer doubles your proficiency in wisdom and intelligence skills that you are proficient with when related to your favored terrain. It does not give you advantage on rolls. It does not help if you are not proficient in a skill. It does not help in straight wisdom and intelligence checks because those are not skills you are proficient with.
My ranger was proficient in athletics, intimidation (soldier background), and stealth. So Natural Explorer only helped with survival, investigation, and perception when related to certain terrains. If the Tasha's options were out back when I played the ranger, I would have preferred Deft Explorer.
There is also Tool proficiencies. Its less reliable but sometimes a dm will allow a tool when Puzzle solving or gathering information in place of a general check.
Side note: Favored enemy allows advantage even if not proficient in intelligence checks .
Not only do Tool Proficiencies potentially count as well. If one were to get into the tool proficiency materials from Xanathar's there can be clues and ideas for several ways to use them for Natural Explorer and a whole lot of very useful ways to use it outside of Natural Explorer. I really recommend that people take a look at it. There is all kinds of value to it. Like Brewers being able to make various kinds of healing potions if they just have a little time. At least a couple of basic ones a weak.
And that's just one exmple of general usage. But Natural Explorer specific could be that any ranger with Natural Explorer could percieve and understand the secret message in a painting with a forest and castle motif if Forest is a favored Terrain that many people aren't going to realize.
Xanathar's actually does a fair bit to enhance the exploration and environmental parts of the game that I recommend All DM's read a few times over and Players at least have a passing familiarity with.
I am sorry but claiming "with Natural Explorer [you] could percieve and understand the secret message in a painting with a forest and castle motif if Forest is a favored Terrain" is a ludicrous claim. Also saying "there can be clues and ideas for several ways to use [tools] for Natural Explorer" makes no sense. How are you connecting tools to NE?
it's ludicrous to you. But then we're aware your rather against most anything to do with Natural Explorer.
lol, not against it, I just think some of the things I am seeing people claim are really outside the scope.
Ok, pretend I am your DM, explain to me how your favored terrain being the forest helps you analyze a painting of a castle in a forest for hidden messages?
From Optimus' post quoting you (I assume you are the Frank he referenced)...
"Arcana would be a strange one for sure. Just for a ranger alone. But it could be made, and I know many don't like this idea, about things and creatures that exist in the terrain. The underdark is a great example of this." - Not sure what you are even saying here
"History is an easy one. In a real world way in which a tour guide or historian would know all about a civilization, battle or other historical event that took place in a region, a ranger would know all about the history, folklore, and fables (also possibly arcana) of a given large region." - so your claim is if my favored terrain is the forest, I can apply NE to ANY event that happened in ANY forest at ANY time in history? So my ranger, because the forest is a favored terrain, knows about an event that happened 5000 years ago on the other side of the world, in a place he/she has never been? Tour guides and historians know things because they have specifically studied them.
"Investigation is often underutilized in favor of perception, but they are very different. To gain the double proficiency when using investigation it would have to be related to a favored terrain. So I think of forests and investigating in a greenhouse, or for a secret door hidden by ivy or vines," - you are stretching here. A greenhouse and a forest have very little in common. I would argue that you could get advantage on identifying the plants. "or signs of a struggle from a animal from the forest." - again, pretty vague but I would grant you identifying claw marks/footprints, so this one checks out.
"Perhaps mountains would make you keener at looking for clues in a cave system (given the stone types and such)," I would argue Underdark in a cave more than mountain, but you might be able to convince me, I am gonna more than 'they're both rock' "or how a trap made to be hidden on a mountain trail doesn't fit in to the natural surroundings." What? Are you suggesting that someone would make a trap that could be hidden well on a mountain and leave it in the swamp, so you get advantage on finding it because it was made foe the mountain? Why would ANYONE do that? "Swamp could be looking through manuscripts about plants or creatures that live in those parts of the world," Looking for what exactly, if the author is just making it up? "or when trying to ascertain the cause of a poison or disease." - this one makes sense, I will agree that a poison or disease could relate.
"Nature is also an easy one. Even in a city that is in an area of the favored terrain type a ranger can predict weather very well." - this makes no sense for a few reason, firs 'even in a city' means you are not in a favored terrain as city isn't an option. So no, you are not predicting the weather in the city because you can predict the weather in the forest. Now you can argue, and I would, that a Ranger in general can predict the weather, but outside of your favored environment no NE advantage. "Knowing information about any flora and fauna from the favored terrain like at fish market, herbalist shop, or picking out some pack animals. Gardening, making poisons, or plotting a route on a map through your favored terrain. - part of this makes sense, yes if there are plants or animals that exist naturally in your favored terrain, sure apply NE.
"Religion is a tough one for sure, except there are several deities that are of the forest and feywild, so a ranger would literately be an expert in this." - Why? Do you have a connection to that deity, do you worship them? Unless that is part of the character background I am ruling no, and if it is part of your background I am gonna need convincing you should get NE. "If there humanoid cultures that live in the terrain, coastal has many of these, as might swamps or mountains, a ranger might be very knowledgeable in these rituals and rites." - again here you are really stretching, there is no way as a DM I am allowing you to say you know jack crap abut a village you've never been to just because it is on the coast (or where ever) and you have coast (or where ever) as a favored terrain.
"I'll be honest, for me animal handling is basically expertise in animal handling for a ranger. Fish, mammal, insect, reptile, bird, all beasts. If a ranger takes animal handling as a proficiency (they should), I give them expertise almost all the time unless it is an incredibly bizarre circumstance." - That sounds like a personal choice which is totally fine, but not really they way the rules work, but here you at least clarified that this is just something you do.
"Insight is a tough one, but I can think of it working when dealing with fantastical creatures that are tightly tied with a given landscape. Thinking of treants and forests, merfolk and the coast, giants and the mountains, hags and the swamps." - Maybe, but this feels like you are starting to step on the toes of Favored enemy, so I am gonna say no to that one.
"Medicine plays a lot like nature in that poisons, diseases, and even the cause of wounds that are from elements or origins of a given terrain can be better treated via this skill. Also in the swamp, coast, or forest where plant life is nearby known to help with treat ailments (burns, wounds, stabilizing, poisons, etc.) a ranger can use this knowledge to their advantage." - I would grant this in the way you are describing it, but to be honest I usually let a player, or as a player ask to use nature in place of medicine as druid/ranger/nature cleric etc.
"Perception makes the most sense in the terrain," - makes sense "but if the thing you're trying to perceive is of or from the terrain the ranger would be better suited to paying attention to it the most." - I see where you are coming from on this, but that is a stretch and I can't see many times this would come up, so I would probably say no to that. "The sound of an animal, the smell of plant, animal, or other feature (swamps and coasts have smells that are distinct) would peak the ranger's senses." - This makes sense in a way, but more so for the plant part, the animal part starts to step on Favored Enemy Beast.
"Noticing something out of sorts in a painting or tapestry of their terrain." - Utter nonsense, this make no sense at all.
"Survival also makes the most sense in the landscape. However, this is a mental skill, so plotting a route on a map, planning an attack on something in the terrain type, anticipating what will be needed to traverse a harsh landscape, or calculating the travel time and supplies needed for a group to go from point A to point B are all examples of using this skill before setting out from a village or city." - sure, I have no problem with that.
From Optimus' post quoting you (I assume you are the Frank he referenced)...
"Arcana would be a strange one for sure. Just for a ranger alone. But it could be made, and I know many don't like this idea, about things and creatures that exist in the terrain. The underdark is a great example of this." - Not sure what you are even saying here
"History is an easy one. In a real world way in which a tour guide or historian would know all about a civilization, battle or other historical event that took place in a region, a ranger would know all about the history, folklore, and fables (also possibly arcana) of a given large region." - so your claim is if my favored terrain is the forest, I can apply NE to ANY event that happened in ANY forest at ANY time in history? So my ranger, because the forest is a favored terrain, knows about an event that happened 5000 years ago on the other side of the world, in a place he/she has never been? Tour guides and historians know things because they have specifically studied them.
"Investigation is often underutilized in favor of perception, but they are very different. To gain the double proficiency when using investigation it would have to be related to a favored terrain. So I think of forests and investigating in a greenhouse, or for a secret door hidden by ivy or vines," - you are stretching here. A greenhouse and a forest have very little in common. I would argue that you could get advantage on identifying the plants. "or signs of a struggle from a animal from the forest." - again, pretty vague but I would grant you identifying claw marks/footprints, so this one checks out.
"Perhaps mountains would make you keener at looking for clues in a cave system (given the stone types and such)," I would argue Underdark in a cave more than mountain, but you might be able to convince me, I am gonna more than 'they're both rock' "or how a trap made to be hidden on a mountain trail doesn't fit in to the natural surroundings." What? Are you suggesting that someone would make a trap that could be hidden well on a mountain and leave it in the swamp, so you get advantage on finding it because it was made foe the mountain? Why would ANYONE do that? "Swamp could be looking through manuscripts about plants or creatures that live in those parts of the world," Looking for what exactly, if the author is just making it up? "or when trying to ascertain the cause of a poison or disease." - this one makes sense, I will agree that a poison or disease could relate.
"Nature is also an easy one. Even in a city that is in an area of the favored terrain type a ranger can predict weather very well." - this makes no sense for a few reason, firs 'even in a city' means you are not in a favored terrain as city isn't an option. So no, you are not predicting the weather in the city because you can predict the weather in the forest. Now you can argue, and I would, that a Ranger in general can predict the weather, but outside of your favored environment no NE advantage. "Knowing information about any flora and fauna from the favored terrain like at fish market, herbalist shop, or picking out some pack animals. Gardening, making poisons, or plotting a route on a map through your favored terrain. - part of this makes sense, yes if there are plants or animals that exist naturally in your favored terrain, sure apply NE.
"Religion is a tough one for sure, except there are several deities that are of the forest and feywild, so a ranger would literately be an expert in this." - Why? Do you have a connection to that deity, do you worship them? Unless that is part of the character background I am ruling no, and if it is part of your background I am gonna need convincing you should get NE. "If there humanoid cultures that live in the terrain, coastal has many of these, as might swamps or mountains, a ranger might be very knowledgeable in these rituals and rites." - again here you are really stretching, there is no way as a DM I am allowing you to say you know jack crap abut a village you've never been to just because it is on the coast (or where ever) and you have coast (or where ever) as a favored terrain.
"I'll be honest, for me animal handling is basically expertise in animal handling for a ranger. Fish, mammal, insect, reptile, bird, all beasts. If a ranger takes animal handling as a proficiency (they should), I give them expertise almost all the time unless it is an incredibly bizarre circumstance." - That sounds like a personal choice which is totally fine, but not really they way the rules work, but here you at least clarified that this is just something you do.
"Insight is a tough one, but I can think of it working when dealing with fantastical creatures that are tightly tied with a given landscape. Thinking of treants and forests, merfolk and the coast, giants and the mountains, hags and the swamps." - Maybe, but this feels like you are starting to step on the toes of Favored enemy, so I am gonna say no to that one.
"Medicine plays a lot like nature in that poisons, diseases, and even the cause of wounds that are from elements or origins of a given terrain can be better treated via this skill. Also in the swamp, coast, or forest where plant life is nearby known to help with treat ailments (burns, wounds, stabilizing, poisons, etc.) a ranger can use this knowledge to their advantage." - I would grant this in the way you are describing it, but to be honest I usually let a player, or as a player ask to use nature in place of medicine as druid/ranger/nature cleric etc.
"Perception makes the most sense in the terrain," - makes sense "but if the thing you're trying to perceive is of or from the terrain the ranger would be better suited to paying attention to it the most." - I see where you are coming from on this, but that is a stretch and I can't see many times this would come up, so I would probably say no to that. "The sound of an animal, the smell of plant, animal, or other feature (swamps and coasts have smells that are distinct) would peak the ranger's senses." - This makes sense in a way, but more so for the plant part, the animal part starts to step on Favored Enemy Beast.
"Noticing something out of sorts in a painting or tapestry of their terrain." - Utter nonsense, this make no sense at all.
"Survival also makes the most sense in the landscape. However, this is a mental skill, so plotting a route on a map, planning an attack on something in the terrain type, anticipating what will be needed to traverse a harsh landscape, or calculating the travel time and supplies needed for a group to go from point A to point B are all examples of using this skill before setting out from a village or city." - sure, I have no problem with that.
Aaron. How. Many. Times. Do. People. Have. To. Tell. You. That. You. Don't. Have. To. Be. In. The. Terrain. For. The. Double. Proficiency. Bones. To. Work?
And again, you, like several others in these ranger forums, are activity and aggressively trying to find ways for these abilities and others to NOT work. Is this fun for you?
I am sorry but claiming "with Natural Explorer [you] could percieve and understand the secret message in a painting with a forest and castle motif if Forest is a favored Terrain" is a ludicrous claim. Also saying "there can be clues and ideas for several ways to use [tools] for Natural Explorer" makes no sense. How are you connecting tools to NE?
A ranger with FT in forest would naturally be drawn to issues that look unnatural or forced. leaves that make an odd symbol or letter. Objects out of place signaling significant locations or plants never found in the area. Remember all it needs is a reason you might have a better chance than an unstudied person. There is still a chance of a bad roll meaning it might still fail depending on the difficulty.
As for tools and NE how about a brewer and a specific wine made from flowers that only grow in one region. or a wine made with a drop of venom from a local creature or mushroom.(yes they really exist)
I do not think the examples above are far fetched at all. There may be times when it won't work but there are times when it should. The problem occurs when dms (or players) never consider the implication of such features. That is why I think PHB ranger is A vital inclusion in 5e. It both forces players to think tactically and plan but it also forces out of the box creativity. this is good for both players and dms in the long run.
"A ranger with FT in forest would naturally be drawn to issues that look unnatural or forced. leaves that make an odd symbol or letter. Objects out of place signaling significant locations or plants never found in the area." Or the artist isn't very good and the plants don't look natural, or they just think a type of flower is pretty and they put it in - sorry, but no, this doesn't work at all - I would call analyzing art a performance check.
"As for tools and NE how about a brewer and a specific wine made from flowers that only grow in one region. or a wine made with a drop of venom from a local creature or mushroom.(yes they really exist)" - ok, but unless I am mistaken when you are applying proficiency from multiple sources you can pick one, so you would either get NE or the tool prof.
"out of the box creativity" is a great thing, I love to home brew and come up with fun solutions, but some of these just can't work the way you describe.
"The sound of an animal, the smell of plant, animal, or other feature (swamps and coasts have smells that are distinct) would peak the ranger's senses." - This makes sense in a way, but more so for the plant part, the animal part starts to step on Favored Enemy Beast.
There is literally no mechanical justification for this complaint. FE grants advantage. FT grants "functional expertise(AKA double proficiency)" It still is less powerful than a rogue with expertise and Reliable talent but on a comparable level. Meaning both classes should do what they do well.
"A ranger with FT in forest would naturally be drawn to issues that look unnatural or forced. leaves that make an odd symbol or letter. Objects out of place signaling significant locations or plants never found in the area." Or the artist isn't very good and the plants don't look natural, or they just think a type of flower is pretty and they put it in - sorry, but no, this doesn't work at all - I would call analyzing art a performance check.
"As for tools and NE how about a brewer and a specific wine made from flowers that only grow in one region. or a wine made with a drop of venom from a local creature or mushroom.(yes they really exist)" - ok, but unless I am mistaken when you are applying proficiency from multiple sources you can pick one, so you would either get NE or the tool prof.
"out of the box creativity" is a great thing, I love to home brew and come up with fun solutions, but some of these just can't work the way you describe.
Point 1. There is nothing to say a bard with performance and a ranger with forests can't both get the bonus. .Your interpretation would give a bard that has music training (and no art) an Equal bonus to a ranger who might have studied the same painting or similar part of theirs. That sounds ludicrous to me.
Point 2. Just wrong . If its an intelligence and you have proficiency you get double. Doesn't matter if its tool or skill.
Point 3. Please don't switch topics mid sentence to try and prove your dismissal of an unrelated point.
"The sound of an animal, the smell of plant, animal, or other feature (swamps and coasts have smells that are distinct) would peak the ranger's senses." - This makes sense in a way, but more so for the plant part, the animal part starts to step on Favored Enemy Beast.
There is literally no mechanical justification for this complaint. FE grants advantage. FT grants "functional expertise(AKA double proficiency)" It still is less powerful than a rogue with expertise and Reliable talent but on a comparable level. Meaning both classes should do what they do well.
If you want to make an animal handling check to identify an animal sound, roll it. If you say "do I get advantage since we are in my favored terrain" my response is "Are beast a favored enemy?" The justification is that you are trying get an extra free favored enemy if it is a creature from a favored terrain.
Natural Explorer doubles your proficiency in wisdom and intelligence skills that you are proficient with when related to your favored terrain. It does not give you advantage on rolls. It does not help if you are not proficient in a skill. It does not help in straight wisdom and intelligence checks because those are not skills you are proficient with.
My ranger was proficient in athletics, intimidation (soldier background), and stealth. So Natural Explorer only helped with survival, investigation, and perception when related to certain terrains. If the Tasha's options were out back when I played the ranger, I would have preferred Deft Explorer.
There is also Tool proficiencies. Its less reliable but sometimes a dm will allow a tool when Puzzle solving or gathering information in place of a general check.
Side note: Favored enemy allows advantage even if not proficient in intelligence checks .
Not only do Tool Proficiencies potentially count as well. If one were to get into the tool proficiency materials from Xanathar's there can be clues and ideas for several ways to use them for Natural Explorer and a whole lot of very useful ways to use it outside of Natural Explorer. I really recommend that people take a look at it. There is all kinds of value to it. Like Brewers being able to make various kinds of healing potions if they just have a little time. At least a couple of basic ones a weak.
And that's just one exmple of general usage. But Natural Explorer specific could be that any ranger with Natural Explorer could percieve and understand the secret message in a painting with a forest and castle motif if Forest is a favored Terrain that many people aren't going to realize.
Xanathar's actually does a fair bit to enhance the exploration and environmental parts of the game that I recommend All DM's read a few times over and Players at least have a passing familiarity with.
I am sorry but claiming "with Natural Explorer [you] could percieve and understand the secret message in a painting with a forest and castle motif if Forest is a favored Terrain" is a ludicrous claim. Also saying "there can be clues and ideas for several ways to use [tools] for Natural Explorer" makes no sense. How are you connecting tools to NE?
it's ludicrous to you. But then we're aware your rather against most anything to do with Natural Explorer.
lol, not against it, I just think some of the things I am seeing people claim are really outside the scope.
Ok, pretend I am your DM, explain to me how your favored terrain being the forest helps you analyze a painting of a castle in a forest for hidden messages?
Pretend I'm in your game and your my DM? With what I've seen? That's easy. The two answers are either. "Fine. Let me change my character to another class" Or "I'm sorry but I cannot play in this game anymore. Your biases and restrictions are far too stifling for any interesting kind of play or usage of powers that my character has that you clearly dislike." Depending purely on how I'd seen you be on other things. But I have mostly only dealt with you about rangers so far so Right now I'd lean towards the first one. But I'd be keeping the second response in mind.
Because the Truth is. I had an explanation response typed up. I deleted it. Why you might ask?
Because it has been clear with your biases and the way you shoot anything and everything down that you would have just written it off and naysayed it. Your response was obvious before I even finished so i didn't bother. Which means I'm either going to play something your not biased against. Or I'm going to not play in your game.
"A ranger with FT in forest would naturally be drawn to issues that look unnatural or forced. leaves that make an odd symbol or letter. Objects out of place signaling significant locations or plants never found in the area." Or the artist isn't very good and the plants don't look natural, or they just think a type of flower is pretty and they put it in - sorry, but no, this doesn't work at all - I would call analyzing art a performance check.
"As for tools and NE how about a brewer and a specific wine made from flowers that only grow in one region. or a wine made with a drop of venom from a local creature or mushroom.(yes they really exist)" - ok, but unless I am mistaken when you are applying proficiency from multiple sources you can pick one, so you would either get NE or the tool prof.
Natural Explorer is not an Either/Or type of ability and it is NOT a Proficiency of it's own. It's more of an AND ability. It adds on extra to something the Ranger could normally do and when it applies it does so regardless of what ever else is involved. All that it requires to apply is Proficiency, Which yes is even provided by Tool Proficiencies (thus their name) They still give the proficiency bonus, And that it be related to one of your Terrains. That is it. It doesn't say if you are using tools it does not apply. It only says "if you have proficiency on the roll that involves either Intelligence or Wisdom", With the unspoken continuation of "Regardless of what gives you proficiency on that roll", Then you double the proficiency bonus that you get.
There is no caveat anywhere in the way it's written that only proficiency from certain kids of sources count. And there is precident that Tool Proficiencies are Functionally a different form of Skill Proficiency. They are a roll of an Ability Attribute combined with your Proficiency modifier for things involving the skills with those tools in some way. They are basically practical application knowledge skills, Or Trade Skills if you will. But they are still skills.
From Optimus' post quoting you (I assume you are the Frank he referenced)...
"Arcana would be a strange one for sure. Just for a ranger alone. But it could be made, and I know many don't like this idea, about things and creatures that exist in the terrain. The underdark is a great example of this." - Not sure what you are even saying here
"History is an easy one. In a real world way in which a tour guide or historian would know all about a civilization, battle or other historical event that took place in a region, a ranger would know all about the history, folklore, and fables (also possibly arcana) of a given large region." - so your claim is if my favored terrain is the forest, I can apply NE to ANY event that happened in ANY forest at ANY time in history? So my ranger, because the forest is a favored terrain, knows about an event that happened 5000 years ago on the other side of the world, in a place he/she has never been? Tour guides and historians know things because they have specifically studied them.
"Investigation is often underutilized in favor of perception, but they are very different. To gain the double proficiency when using investigation it would have to be related to a favored terrain. So I think of forests and investigating in a greenhouse, or for a secret door hidden by ivy or vines," - you are stretching here. A greenhouse and a forest have very little in common. I would argue that you could get advantage on identifying the plants. "or signs of a struggle from a animal from the forest." - again, pretty vague but I would grant you identifying claw marks/footprints, so this one checks out.
"Perhaps mountains would make you keener at looking for clues in a cave system (given the stone types and such)," I would argue Underdark in a cave more than mountain, but you might be able to convince me, I am gonna more than 'they're both rock' "or how a trap made to be hidden on a mountain trail doesn't fit in to the natural surroundings." What? Are you suggesting that someone would make a trap that could be hidden well on a mountain and leave it in the swamp, so you get advantage on finding it because it was made foe the mountain? Why would ANYONE do that? "Swamp could be looking through manuscripts about plants or creatures that live in those parts of the world," Looking for what exactly, if the author is just making it up? "or when trying to ascertain the cause of a poison or disease." - this one makes sense, I will agree that a poison or disease could relate.
"Nature is also an easy one. Even in a city that is in an area of the favored terrain type a ranger can predict weather very well." - this makes no sense for a few reason, firs 'even in a city' means you are not in a favored terrain as city isn't an option. So no, you are not predicting the weather in the city because you can predict the weather in the forest. Now you can argue, and I would, that a Ranger in general can predict the weather, but outside of your favored environment no NE advantage. "Knowing information about any flora and fauna from the favored terrain like at fish market, herbalist shop, or picking out some pack animals. Gardening, making poisons, or plotting a route on a map through your favored terrain. - part of this makes sense, yes if there are plants or animals that exist naturally in your favored terrain, sure apply NE.
"Religion is a tough one for sure, except there are several deities that are of the forest and feywild, so a ranger would literately be an expert in this." - Why? Do you have a connection to that deity, do you worship them? Unless that is part of the character background I am ruling no, and if it is part of your background I am gonna need convincing you should get NE. "If there humanoid cultures that live in the terrain, coastal has many of these, as might swamps or mountains, a ranger might be very knowledgeable in these rituals and rites." - again here you are really stretching, there is no way as a DM I am allowing you to say you know jack crap abut a village you've never been to just because it is on the coast (or where ever) and you have coast (or where ever) as a favored terrain.
"I'll be honest, for me animal handling is basically expertise in animal handling for a ranger. Fish, mammal, insect, reptile, bird, all beasts. If a ranger takes animal handling as a proficiency (they should), I give them expertise almost all the time unless it is an incredibly bizarre circumstance." - That sounds like a personal choice which is totally fine, but not really they way the rules work, but here you at least clarified that this is just something you do.
"Insight is a tough one, but I can think of it working when dealing with fantastical creatures that are tightly tied with a given landscape. Thinking of treants and forests, merfolk and the coast, giants and the mountains, hags and the swamps." - Maybe, but this feels like you are starting to step on the toes of Favored enemy, so I am gonna say no to that one.
"Medicine plays a lot like nature in that poisons, diseases, and even the cause of wounds that are from elements or origins of a given terrain can be better treated via this skill. Also in the swamp, coast, or forest where plant life is nearby known to help with treat ailments (burns, wounds, stabilizing, poisons, etc.) a ranger can use this knowledge to their advantage." - I would grant this in the way you are describing it, but to be honest I usually let a player, or as a player ask to use nature in place of medicine as druid/ranger/nature cleric etc.
"Perception makes the most sense in the terrain," - makes sense "but if the thing you're trying to perceive is of or from the terrain the ranger would be better suited to paying attention to it the most." - I see where you are coming from on this, but that is a stretch and I can't see many times this would come up, so I would probably say no to that. "The sound of an animal, the smell of plant, animal, or other feature (swamps and coasts have smells that are distinct) would peak the ranger's senses." - This makes sense in a way, but more so for the plant part, the animal part starts to step on Favored Enemy Beast.
"Noticing something out of sorts in a painting or tapestry of their terrain." - Utter nonsense, this make no sense at all.
"Survival also makes the most sense in the landscape. However, this is a mental skill, so plotting a route on a map, planning an attack on something in the terrain type, anticipating what will be needed to traverse a harsh landscape, or calculating the travel time and supplies needed for a group to go from point A to point B are all examples of using this skill before setting out from a village or city." - sure, I have no problem with that.
Aaron. How. Many. Times. Do. People. Have. To. Tell. You. That. You. Don't. Have. To. Be. In. The. Terrain. For. The. Double. Proficiency. Bones. To. Work?
And again, you, like several others in these ranger forums, are activity and aggressively trying to find ways for these abilities and others to NOT work. Is this fun for you?
You gave me a list of explanations, I provide specific responses to each one and the only thing you have to say is "You. Don't. Have. To. Be. In. The. Terrain"? You can repeat that assertion all day long. I am not even disagreeing with the premise, for instance I agreed that being able to recognize plants and animals in the city from that terrain would get the bonus. It isn't the concept we disagree on - it is the applications you are trying, and yes, pointing out why these things don't make sense is fun.
I do not agree that you should be able to track/recall information about a creature with double prof. simply because you are in your favored terrain. That clearly overlaps with favored enemy.
Also the rogue in the party is just recalling things with Survival with expertise all the time regardless of where you are at or how much spin you have to put on something to get it to shoehorn into the terrain somehow.
Honestly I would find it kind of exhausting to have a ranger always trying to somehow make every check they want to make with double prof. by somehow trying to relate it back to a Forrest....its easier and much more conducive for everyone to just give him expertise in survival and move on.
Also a DM is allowed to give out ADV or set DCs as they see fit anyway...You could do all of this without having a class feature make you do it.
I would do the same for the fighter who is from Baulder's Gate know about the basic geopolitical climate in the area as he served as a guard. I would give him a potentially lower DC to know History about the town. I would give him ADV to track an enemy through the streets because he grew up there.
This is stuff I already do with my players based on their background and backstory....I do not need a class feature telling me to do it.
I do not agree that you should be able to track/recall information about a creature with double prof. simply because you are in your favored terrain. That clearly overlaps with favored enemy.
Also the rogue in the party is just recalling things with Survival with expertise all the time regardless of where you are at or how much spin you have to put on something to get it to shoehorn into the terrain somehow.
Honestly I would find it kind of exhausting to have a ranger always trying to somehow make every check they want to make with double prof. by somehow trying to relate it back to a Forrest....its easier and much more conducive for everyone to just give him expertise in survival and move on.
Also a DM is allowed to give out ADV or set DCs as they see fit anyway...You could do all of this without having a class feature make you do it.
I would do the same for the fighter who is from Baulder's Gate know about the basic geopolitical climate in the area as he served as a guard. I would give him a potentially lower DC to know History about the town. I would give him ADV to track an enemy through the streets because he grew up there.
This is stuff I already do with my players based on their background and backstory....I do not need a class feature telling me to do it.
If your already getting something from Favored Foe then it doesn't really matter if favored Terrain would do it to now does it? Regardless of if your actually in your favored Terrain.
The Rogue in the Party doesn't necessarily have Expertise in Survival. So this is a false equivalency. And even if it does it's not necessarily as naturally skilled at it as the Ranger is. Without building the Rogue Specifically for this niche... which means taking away from other things the rogue might be wanting to do. The Rogue even with Expertise isn't necessarily doing any better than the Ranger even with Expertise. Regardless of what Terrain they are actually in. Because the Rangers likely proficiency in Survival combined with his natural focus on Wisdom is going to balance things out. Also the Ranger is not somehow completely banned from picking up Expertise themselves if they want to get it. Which does not shut off all the other Functions of Natural explorer if they do. And in fact by doing so they can pick up an additional skill that might actually have ways to apply Natural Explorer to anyway.
And if you get tired of the Ranger trying to tie everything back to forests or mountains. Let's not pretend this is only a Ranger thing and there aren't always players that we are going to run into in various games that are always going to try to relate everything they do to Skills they do have good numbers in over skills they don't have good numbers in. Let's instead realize that the same reason that Players do this, because there are sometimes reasonable alternatives, Might actually have some merit when it comes to Rangers instead of being Hard no on Rangers but letting it slide elsewhere.
You say your already giving Advantage and various things out for things like having grown up in Baldur's Gate. It really shouldn't be that hard to apply the same thing to Rangers and the various things that are in and have to do with their Favored Terrain as well. Or possibly their Favored Foe. It's just another thing like the Background and the backstory that is shaping the character.
"The Rogue in the Party doesn't necessarily have Expertise in Survival. So this is a false equivalency. And even if it does it's not necessarily as naturally skilled at it as the Ranger is. Without building the Rogue Specifically for this niche... which means taking away from other things the rogue might be wanting to do. The Rogue even with Expertise isn't necessarily doing any better than the Ranger even with Expertise"
1. It's not a false equivalence. If you believe NE and Terrain are like skills then what you pick for them is comparable to what a rogue picks for their skills.
2. A rogue can really easily focus on WIS as a second stat and thanks to the extra ASI they get they can very easy have a higher wisdom then a ranger by level 10.
3. That's the sad part... The ranger isn't any better than the rogue even in their favored terrain.... They are at best equal in the one thing they are supposed to be better at. Meanwhile the Scout Rogue basically has this for all terrains and it doesn't even count against the known expertise they get.
"The Rogue in the Party doesn't necessarily have Expertise in Survival. So this is a false equivalency. And even if it does it's not necessarily as naturally skilled at it as the Ranger is. Without building the Rogue Specifically for this niche... which means taking away from other things the rogue might be wanting to do. The Rogue even with Expertise isn't necessarily doing any better than the Ranger even with Expertise"
1. It's not a false equivalence. If you believe NE and Terrain are like skills then what you pick for them is comparable to what a rogue picks for their skills.
2. A rogue can really easily focus on WIS as a second stat and thanks to the extra ASI they get they can very easy have a higher wisdom then a ranger by level 10.
3. That's the sad part... The ranger isn't any better than the rogue even in their favored terrain.... They are at best equal in the one thing they are supposed to be better at. Meanwhile the Scout Rogue basically has this for all terrains and it doesn't even count against the known expertise they get.
1. I never said that NE was like Skills. The only thing I said that was like Skills was Tool Proficiencies. Because they are. What i said about Natural Explorer is that they add extra things onto skills that you use. So yes. You made a False Equivalency... and then you misinterpreted and changed my words on top of it.
2. No they wouldn't necessarily have a higher Wisdom than a ranger at level 10 even with the Added ASI. Considering their first two ASI's are going to likely be spent on Dexterity in some way. Which is not necessarily true for the Ranger. The Ranger could easily put at least one of those ASI's into wisdom and not suffer for it considering half of their class is driven off of Wisdom and they actually gain out of having the Increased DC. The Ranger can also choose to actually start with Wisdom as it's highest stat. Meaning that They could then spend Both their ASI's at 4 and 8 on Dexterity and still end up as high of Wisdom as the Rogue without actually sacrificing anything to their build very easily. The rogue just does not win out clearly in this regard in any way you swing it and takes particular building that is going to take away from other places for the rogue. ALWAYS. Even with the Scout Rogue lessening that by giving free Expertise. But Any Rogue besides Scout actually has to sacrifice one or more of their Expertise to skills that could be used in many other places to even equal the Ranger in just the two easiest to comprehend skills of Nature and Survival. Which is also something people repeatedly ignore. And yet it's still not doing as much as it is for the Ranger because there is potential for it to apply to even more skills, even if just situationally.
3. Your outright lying when you say that the Ranger isn't any better than the Rogue in their favored Terrain because the Rogue still cannot do anything else that the Ranger can do with their Natural Explorer in their favored Terrain that the Ranger can do with it. The Ranger in their Favored Terrain is always going to forage better, always going to track better. Always going to navigate better. There is just no way around that. No matter how much you discount and discard what the Ranger is actually capable of.
You've made these kinds of claims repeatedly and you never listen when they are refuted. You just keep making these same false claims and false equivalencies of ability.
"The Rogue in the Party doesn't necessarily have Expertise in Survival. So this is a false equivalency. And even if it does it's not necessarily as naturally skilled at it as the Ranger is. Without building the Rogue Specifically for this niche... which means taking away from other things the rogue might be wanting to do. The Rogue even with Expertise isn't necessarily doing any better than the Ranger even with Expertise"
1. It's not a false equivalence. If you believe NE and Terrain are like skills then what you pick for them is comparable to what a rogue picks for their skills.
2. A rogue can really easily focus on WIS as a second stat and thanks to the extra ASI they get they can very easy have a higher wisdom then a ranger by level 10.
3. That's the sad part... The ranger isn't any better than the rogue even in their favored terrain.... They are at best equal in the one thing they are supposed to be better at. Meanwhile the Scout Rogue basically has this for all terrains and it doesn't even count against the known expertise they get.
1. I never said that NE was like Skills. The only thing I said that was like Skills was Tool Proficiencies. Because they are. What i said about Natural Explorer is that they add extra things onto skills that you use. So yes. You made a False Equivalency... and then you misinterpreted and changed my words on top of it.
2. No they wouldn't necessarily have a higher Wisdom than a ranger at level 10 even with the Added ASI. Considering their first two ASI's are going to likely be spent on Dexterity in some way. Which is not necessarily true for the Ranger. The Ranger could easily put at least one of those ASI's into wisdom and not suffer for it considering half of their class is driven off of Wisdom and they actually gain out of having the Increased DC. The Ranger can also choose to actually start with Wisdom as it's highest stat. Meaning that They could then spend Both their ASI's at 4 and 8 on Dexterity and still end up as high of Wisdom as the Rogue without actually sacrificing anything to their build very easily. The rogue just does not win out clearly in this regard in any way you swing it and takes particular building that is going to take away from other places for the rogue. ALWAYS. Even with the Scout Rogue lessening that by giving free Expertise. But Any Rogue besides Scout actually has to sacrifice one or more of their Expertise to skills that could be used in many other places to even equal the Ranger in just the two easiest to comprehend skills of Nature and Survival. Which is also something people repeatedly ignore. And yet it's still not doing as much as it is for the Ranger because there is potential for it to apply to even more skills, even if just situationally.
3. Your outright lying when you say that the Ranger isn't any better than the Rogue in their favored Terrain because the Rogue still cannot do anything else that the Ranger can do with their Natural Explorer in their favored Terrain that the Ranger can do with it. The Ranger in their Favored Terrain is always going to forage better, always going to track better. Always going to navigate better. There is just no way around that. No matter how much you discount and discard what the Ranger is actually capable of.
You've made these kinds of claims repeatedly and you never listen when they are refuted. You just keep making these same false claims and false equivalencies of ability.
No....a ranger has two ASI between 1 and 10.
A rouge has 3.
Even if they both went DEX first (Which honestly why wouldn't they both do that? they are martials first) the rogue would have an extra ASI to increase WIS if they wanted. Ranger does not. So if the rogue wanted to increase WIS they have more chances to do so....more than a ranger.
So even if you play the "Well maybe ranger will increase WIS" card...rogue will always be able to increase it the same until level 8 and then have an extra ASI at 10 to play with to make themselves even better like say pick up Fey touched and get Hunters mark...
They, again, are at best the same....or ranger is worse off.
A rogue gets 4 expertise (6 for scout) by level 10. Investigation and Survival are general enough that you do not lose anything by picking them as Expertise. Scout just gets Survival and Nature for free...which already means they are better than a ranger at rangering outside of the rangers favored terrain or in any check that does not include knowledge about the terrain.
For number 3 I was strictly talking about skill checks and nothing else as that was the focus of my entire post. Do not move the goalposts and use other abilities within the ability when the discuss has been and is still about skill checks with relevant skills/tools.
There is plenty that rogue gets as part of their base kit that would be of benefit as well and we are comparing apples to apples here....your ability to use skill checks in your favored terrain or related to the terrain.
For scout rogue they are at WORST the same as a ranger for these skill checks....likely better by level 10 if they invest in WIS.
You also make the assumption that ALL rangers have WIS as their second highest stat...which may or may not be true.
Why do rangers have to be better fighters than fighters, better skill monkeys than rogues, and better spellcasters than druids and wizards? I would HOPE that rogues would be good at any skills they focused on as that is kind of their whole deal. That and sneak attack. That's it. These "BLANKs are better at BLANK than rangers are" conversations are crazy! That fact that rangers are compared to and argued about so feverishly 3 or 4 other classes is a major boon of the class.
Natural explorer is WAY more than expertise. Even if you or your table plays the interpretation of it's ability in the most damning and restrictive way, it is still way more than what any rogue can do.
Why do rangers have to be better fighters than fighters, better skill monkeys than rogues, and better spellcasters than druids and wizards? I would HOPE that rogues would be good at any skills they focused on as that is kind of their whole deal. That and sneak attack. That's it. These "BLANKs are better at BLANK than rangers are" conversations are crazy! That fact that rangers are compared to and argued about so feverishly 3 or 4 other classes is a major boon of the class.
Natural explorer is WAY more than expertise. Even if you or your table plays the interpretation of it's ability in the most damning and restrictive way, it is still way more than what any rogue can do.
It really boils down to expertise for the majority of its use and in the other uses its mostly handwaving checks so its not super engaging.
People play ranger for a lot of reasons....I personally play them because they have good spells and interesting subclasses (post PHB that is).
The fact that this poll shows people will mostly forgo Natural Explorer shows that it was not a huge motivator for a good percentage of the play base for Ranger.
I am glad Deft Explorer is an option now as I do not intend to ever use NE ever again....as do 61% of the people who took this survey!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
it's ludicrous to you. But then we're aware your rather against most anything to do with Natural Explorer.
A ranger with FT in forest would naturally be drawn to issues that look unnatural or forced. leaves that make an odd symbol or letter. Objects out of place signaling significant locations or plants never found in the area. Remember all it needs is a reason you might have a better chance than an unstudied person. There is still a chance of a bad roll meaning it might still fail depending on the difficulty.
As for tools and NE how about a brewer and a specific wine made from flowers that only grow in one region. or a wine made with a drop of venom from a local creature or mushroom.(yes they really exist)
I do not think the examples above are far fetched at all. There may be times when it won't work but there are times when it should. The problem occurs when dms (or players) never consider the implication of such features. That is why I think PHB ranger is A vital inclusion in 5e. It both forces players to think tactically and plan but it also forces out of the box creativity. this is good for both players and dms in the long run.
lol, not against it, I just think some of the things I am seeing people claim are really outside the scope.
Ok, pretend I am your DM, explain to me how your favored terrain being the forest helps you analyze a painting of a castle in a forest for hidden messages?
Here you go! https://youtu.be/IwREUYN4UtQ
From Optimus' post quoting you (I assume you are the Frank he referenced)...
"Arcana would be a strange one for sure. Just for a ranger alone. But it could be made, and I know many don't like this idea, about things and creatures that exist in the terrain. The underdark is a great example of this." - Not sure what you are even saying here
"History is an easy one. In a real world way in which a tour guide or historian would know all about a civilization, battle or other historical event that took place in a region, a ranger would know all about the history, folklore, and fables (also possibly arcana) of a given large region." - so your claim is if my favored terrain is the forest, I can apply NE to ANY event that happened in ANY forest at ANY time in history? So my ranger, because the forest is a favored terrain, knows about an event that happened 5000 years ago on the other side of the world, in a place he/she has never been? Tour guides and historians know things because they have specifically studied them.
"Investigation is often underutilized in favor of perception, but they are very different. To gain the double proficiency when using investigation it would have to be related to a favored terrain. So I think of forests and investigating in a greenhouse, or for a secret door hidden by ivy or vines," - you are stretching here. A greenhouse and a forest have very little in common. I would argue that you could get advantage on identifying the plants.
"or signs of a struggle from a animal from the forest." - again, pretty vague but I would grant you identifying claw marks/footprints, so this one checks out.
"Perhaps mountains would make you keener at looking for clues in a cave system (given the stone types and such)," I would argue Underdark in a cave more than mountain, but you might be able to convince me, I am gonna more than 'they're both rock'
"or how a trap made to be hidden on a mountain trail doesn't fit in to the natural surroundings." What? Are you suggesting that someone would make a trap that could be hidden well on a mountain and leave it in the swamp, so you get advantage on finding it because it was made foe the mountain? Why would ANYONE do that?
"Swamp could be looking through manuscripts about plants or creatures that live in those parts of the world," Looking for what exactly, if the author is just making it up?
"or when trying to ascertain the cause of a poison or disease." - this one makes sense, I will agree that a poison or disease could relate.
"Nature is also an easy one. Even in a city that is in an area of the favored terrain type a ranger can predict weather very well." - this makes no sense for a few reason, firs 'even in a city' means you are not in a favored terrain as city isn't an option. So no, you are not predicting the weather in the city because you can predict the weather in the forest. Now you can argue, and I would, that a Ranger in general can predict the weather, but outside of your favored environment no NE advantage.
"Knowing information about any flora and fauna from the favored terrain like at fish market, herbalist shop, or picking out some pack animals. Gardening, making poisons, or plotting a route on a map through your favored terrain. - part of this makes sense, yes if there are plants or animals that exist naturally in your favored terrain, sure apply NE.
"Religion is a tough one for sure, except there are several deities that are of the forest and feywild, so a ranger would literately be an expert in this." - Why? Do you have a connection to that deity, do you worship them? Unless that is part of the character background I am ruling no, and if it is part of your background I am gonna need convincing you should get NE.
"If there humanoid cultures that live in the terrain, coastal has many of these, as might swamps or mountains, a ranger might be very knowledgeable in these rituals and rites." - again here you are really stretching, there is no way as a DM I am allowing you to say you know jack crap abut a village you've never been to just because it is on the coast (or where ever) and you have coast (or where ever) as a favored terrain.
"I'll be honest, for me animal handling is basically expertise in animal handling for a ranger. Fish, mammal, insect, reptile, bird, all beasts. If a ranger takes animal handling as a proficiency (they should), I give them expertise almost all the time unless it is an incredibly bizarre circumstance." - That sounds like a personal choice which is totally fine, but not really they way the rules work, but here you at least clarified that this is just something you do.
"Insight is a tough one, but I can think of it working when dealing with fantastical creatures that are tightly tied with a given landscape. Thinking of treants and forests, merfolk and the coast, giants and the mountains, hags and the swamps." - Maybe, but this feels like you are starting to step on the toes of Favored enemy, so I am gonna say no to that one.
"Medicine plays a lot like nature in that poisons, diseases, and even the cause of wounds that are from elements or origins of a given terrain can be better treated via this skill. Also in the swamp, coast, or forest where plant life is nearby known to help with treat ailments (burns, wounds, stabilizing, poisons, etc.) a ranger can use this knowledge to their advantage." - I would grant this in the way you are describing it, but to be honest I usually let a player, or as a player ask to use nature in place of medicine as druid/ranger/nature cleric etc.
"Perception makes the most sense in the terrain," - makes sense
"but if the thing you're trying to perceive is of or from the terrain the ranger would be better suited to paying attention to it the most." - I see where you are coming from on this, but that is a stretch and I can't see many times this would come up, so I would probably say no to that.
"The sound of an animal, the smell of plant, animal, or other feature (swamps and coasts have smells that are distinct) would peak the ranger's senses." - This makes sense in a way, but more so for the plant part, the animal part starts to step on Favored Enemy Beast.
"Noticing something out of sorts in a painting or tapestry of their terrain." - Utter nonsense, this make no sense at all.
"Survival also makes the most sense in the landscape. However, this is a mental skill, so plotting a route on a map, planning an attack on something in the terrain type, anticipating what will be needed to traverse a harsh landscape, or calculating the travel time and supplies needed for a group to go from point A to point B are all examples of using this skill before setting out from a village or city." - sure, I have no problem with that.
Aaron. How. Many. Times. Do. People. Have. To. Tell. You. That. You. Don't. Have. To. Be. In. The. Terrain. For. The. Double. Proficiency. Bones. To. Work?
And again, you, like several others in these ranger forums, are activity and aggressively trying to find ways for these abilities and others to NOT work. Is this fun for you?
"A ranger with FT in forest would naturally be drawn to issues that look unnatural or forced. leaves that make an odd symbol or letter. Objects out of place signaling significant locations or plants never found in the area." Or the artist isn't very good and the plants don't look natural, or they just think a type of flower is pretty and they put it in - sorry, but no, this doesn't work at all - I would call analyzing art a performance check.
"As for tools and NE how about a brewer and a specific wine made from flowers that only grow in one region. or a wine made with a drop of venom from a local creature or mushroom.(yes they really exist)" - ok, but unless I am mistaken when you are applying proficiency from multiple sources you can pick one, so you would either get NE or the tool prof.
"out of the box creativity" is a great thing, I love to home brew and come up with fun solutions, but some of these just can't work the way you describe.
There is literally no mechanical justification for this complaint. FE grants advantage. FT grants "functional expertise(AKA double proficiency)" It still is less powerful than a rogue with expertise and Reliable talent but on a comparable level. Meaning both classes should do what they do well.
Point 1. There is nothing to say a bard with performance and a ranger with forests can't both get the bonus. .Your interpretation would give a bard that has music training (and no art) an Equal bonus to a ranger who might have studied the same painting or similar part of theirs. That sounds ludicrous to me.
Point 2. Just wrong . If its an intelligence and you have proficiency you get double. Doesn't matter if its tool or skill.
Point 3. Please don't switch topics mid sentence to try and prove your dismissal of an unrelated point.
If you want to make an animal handling check to identify an animal sound, roll it. If you say "do I get advantage since we are in my favored terrain" my response is "Are beast a favored enemy?" The justification is that you are trying get an extra free favored enemy if it is a creature from a favored terrain.
Pretend I'm in your game and your my DM? With what I've seen? That's easy. The two answers are either. "Fine. Let me change my character to another class" Or "I'm sorry but I cannot play in this game anymore. Your biases and restrictions are far too stifling for any interesting kind of play or usage of powers that my character has that you clearly dislike." Depending purely on how I'd seen you be on other things. But I have mostly only dealt with you about rangers so far so Right now I'd lean towards the first one. But I'd be keeping the second response in mind.
Because the Truth is. I had an explanation response typed up. I deleted it. Why you might ask?
Because it has been clear with your biases and the way you shoot anything and everything down that you would have just written it off and naysayed it. Your response was obvious before I even finished so i didn't bother. Which means I'm either going to play something your not biased against. Or I'm going to not play in your game.
Natural Explorer is not an Either/Or type of ability and it is NOT a Proficiency of it's own. It's more of an AND ability. It adds on extra to something the Ranger could normally do and when it applies it does so regardless of what ever else is involved. All that it requires to apply is Proficiency, Which yes is even provided by Tool Proficiencies (thus their name) They still give the proficiency bonus, And that it be related to one of your Terrains. That is it. It doesn't say if you are using tools it does not apply. It only says "if you have proficiency on the roll that involves either Intelligence or Wisdom", With the unspoken continuation of "Regardless of what gives you proficiency on that roll", Then you double the proficiency bonus that you get.
There is no caveat anywhere in the way it's written that only proficiency from certain kids of sources count. And there is precident that Tool Proficiencies are Functionally a different form of Skill Proficiency. They are a roll of an Ability Attribute combined with your Proficiency modifier for things involving the skills with those tools in some way. They are basically practical application knowledge skills, Or Trade Skills if you will. But they are still skills.
You gave me a list of explanations, I provide specific responses to each one and the only thing you have to say is "You. Don't. Have. To. Be. In. The. Terrain"?
You can repeat that assertion all day long. I am not even disagreeing with the premise, for instance I agreed that being able to recognize plants and animals in the city from that terrain would get the bonus. It isn't the concept we disagree on - it is the applications you are trying, and yes, pointing out why these things don't make sense is fun.
I do not agree that you should be able to track/recall information about a creature with double prof. simply because you are in your favored terrain. That clearly overlaps with favored enemy.
Also the rogue in the party is just recalling things with Survival with expertise all the time regardless of where you are at or how much spin you have to put on something to get it to shoehorn into the terrain somehow.
Honestly I would find it kind of exhausting to have a ranger always trying to somehow make every check they want to make with double prof. by somehow trying to relate it back to a Forrest....its easier and much more conducive for everyone to just give him expertise in survival and move on.
Also a DM is allowed to give out ADV or set DCs as they see fit anyway...You could do all of this without having a class feature make you do it.
I would do the same for the fighter who is from Baulder's Gate know about the basic geopolitical climate in the area as he served as a guard. I would give him a potentially lower DC to know History about the town. I would give him ADV to track an enemy through the streets because he grew up there.
This is stuff I already do with my players based on their background and backstory....I do not need a class feature telling me to do it.
If your already getting something from Favored Foe then it doesn't really matter if favored Terrain would do it to now does it? Regardless of if your actually in your favored Terrain.
The Rogue in the Party doesn't necessarily have Expertise in Survival. So this is a false equivalency. And even if it does it's not necessarily as naturally skilled at it as the Ranger is. Without building the Rogue Specifically for this niche... which means taking away from other things the rogue might be wanting to do. The Rogue even with Expertise isn't necessarily doing any better than the Ranger even with Expertise. Regardless of what Terrain they are actually in. Because the Rangers likely proficiency in Survival combined with his natural focus on Wisdom is going to balance things out. Also the Ranger is not somehow completely banned from picking up Expertise themselves if they want to get it. Which does not shut off all the other Functions of Natural explorer if they do. And in fact by doing so they can pick up an additional skill that might actually have ways to apply Natural Explorer to anyway.
And if you get tired of the Ranger trying to tie everything back to forests or mountains. Let's not pretend this is only a Ranger thing and there aren't always players that we are going to run into in various games that are always going to try to relate everything they do to Skills they do have good numbers in over skills they don't have good numbers in. Let's instead realize that the same reason that Players do this, because there are sometimes reasonable alternatives, Might actually have some merit when it comes to Rangers instead of being Hard no on Rangers but letting it slide elsewhere.
You say your already giving Advantage and various things out for things like having grown up in Baldur's Gate. It really shouldn't be that hard to apply the same thing to Rangers and the various things that are in and have to do with their Favored Terrain as well. Or possibly their Favored Foe. It's just another thing like the Background and the backstory that is shaping the character.
"The Rogue in the Party doesn't necessarily have Expertise in Survival. So this is a false equivalency. And even if it does it's not necessarily as naturally skilled at it as the Ranger is. Without building the Rogue Specifically for this niche... which means taking away from other things the rogue might be wanting to do. The Rogue even with Expertise isn't necessarily doing any better than the Ranger even with Expertise"
1. It's not a false equivalence. If you believe NE and Terrain are like skills then what you pick for them is comparable to what a rogue picks for their skills.
2. A rogue can really easily focus on WIS as a second stat and thanks to the extra ASI they get they can very easy have a higher wisdom then a ranger by level 10.
3. That's the sad part... The ranger isn't any better than the rogue even in their favored terrain.... They are at best equal in the one thing they are supposed to be better at. Meanwhile the Scout Rogue basically has this for all terrains and it doesn't even count against the known expertise they get.
1. I never said that NE was like Skills. The only thing I said that was like Skills was Tool Proficiencies. Because they are. What i said about Natural Explorer is that they add extra things onto skills that you use. So yes. You made a False Equivalency... and then you misinterpreted and changed my words on top of it.
2. No they wouldn't necessarily have a higher Wisdom than a ranger at level 10 even with the Added ASI. Considering their first two ASI's are going to likely be spent on Dexterity in some way. Which is not necessarily true for the Ranger. The Ranger could easily put at least one of those ASI's into wisdom and not suffer for it considering half of their class is driven off of Wisdom and they actually gain out of having the Increased DC. The Ranger can also choose to actually start with Wisdom as it's highest stat. Meaning that They could then spend Both their ASI's at 4 and 8 on Dexterity and still end up as high of Wisdom as the Rogue without actually sacrificing anything to their build very easily. The rogue just does not win out clearly in this regard in any way you swing it and takes particular building that is going to take away from other places for the rogue. ALWAYS. Even with the Scout Rogue lessening that by giving free Expertise. But Any Rogue besides Scout actually has to sacrifice one or more of their Expertise to skills that could be used in many other places to even equal the Ranger in just the two easiest to comprehend skills of Nature and Survival. Which is also something people repeatedly ignore. And yet it's still not doing as much as it is for the Ranger because there is potential for it to apply to even more skills, even if just situationally.
3. Your outright lying when you say that the Ranger isn't any better than the Rogue in their favored Terrain because the Rogue still cannot do anything else that the Ranger can do with their Natural Explorer in their favored Terrain that the Ranger can do with it. The Ranger in their Favored Terrain is always going to forage better, always going to track better. Always going to navigate better. There is just no way around that. No matter how much you discount and discard what the Ranger is actually capable of.
You've made these kinds of claims repeatedly and you never listen when they are refuted. You just keep making these same false claims and false equivalencies of ability.
No....a ranger has two ASI between 1 and 10.
A rouge has 3.
Even if they both went DEX first (Which honestly why wouldn't they both do that? they are martials first) the rogue would have an extra ASI to increase WIS if they wanted. Ranger does not. So if the rogue wanted to increase WIS they have more chances to do so....more than a ranger.
So even if you play the "Well maybe ranger will increase WIS" card...rogue will always be able to increase it the same until level 8 and then have an extra ASI at 10 to play with to make themselves even better like say pick up Fey touched and get Hunters mark...
They, again, are at best the same....or ranger is worse off.
A rogue gets 4 expertise (6 for scout) by level 10. Investigation and Survival are general enough that you do not lose anything by picking them as Expertise. Scout just gets Survival and Nature for free...which already means they are better than a ranger at rangering outside of the rangers favored terrain or in any check that does not include knowledge about the terrain.
For number 3 I was strictly talking about skill checks and nothing else as that was the focus of my entire post. Do not move the goalposts and use other abilities within the ability when the discuss has been and is still about skill checks with relevant skills/tools.
There is plenty that rogue gets as part of their base kit that would be of benefit as well and we are comparing apples to apples here....your ability to use skill checks in your favored terrain or related to the terrain.
For scout rogue they are at WORST the same as a ranger for these skill checks....likely better by level 10 if they invest in WIS.
You also make the assumption that ALL rangers have WIS as their second highest stat...which may or may not be true.
Why do rangers have to be better fighters than fighters, better skill monkeys than rogues, and better spellcasters than druids and wizards? I would HOPE that rogues would be good at any skills they focused on as that is kind of their whole deal. That and sneak attack. That's it. These "BLANKs are better at BLANK than rangers are" conversations are crazy! That fact that rangers are compared to and argued about so feverishly 3 or 4 other classes is a major boon of the class.
Natural explorer is WAY more than expertise. Even if you or your table plays the interpretation of it's ability in the most damning and restrictive way, it is still way more than what any rogue can do.
It really boils down to expertise for the majority of its use and in the other uses its mostly handwaving checks so its not super engaging.
People play ranger for a lot of reasons....I personally play them because they have good spells and interesting subclasses (post PHB that is).
The fact that this poll shows people will mostly forgo Natural Explorer shows that it was not a huge motivator for a good percentage of the play base for Ranger.
I am glad Deft Explorer is an option now as I do not intend to ever use NE ever again....as do 61% of the people who took this survey!