I am 99% sure that I can no longer see what your post is referring to. LOL!
Many multiclass builds can in some way mimic what others classes can do. Isn't that why folks multiclass? If someone's idea of what a ranger is happens to be a sneaky person with a bow and arrows, than by all means please play a fighter/rogue. Or...barbarian...for some reason.
On improving the ranger, as the subclass is doing so much of the heavy lifting for the class wouldn't it just be better to have the player pick the archetype/conclave at first or second level.
I didn't read all 6 pages, but I know it was mentioned that Tasha's did a great job helping to smooth out most of the issues the community has with the Ranger.
Really the only 'fixes' at this point I want are to update all subclasses to have spell list, this would include redoing some, but not all of the existing list, so that they do not overlap and that they can include newer spells and to make Hunter's Mark a feature, not a spell - figure out a chart like sneak attack so that it has some degree of scaling. Finally, and this applies to all classes - make a capstone that is actually valuable.
As an aside, rework all of the subclasses (not just Ranger) to model them after the newer designs (doing things like basing abilities off of proficiency bonus and not an ability score) and to modernize features that are bad versions of what other classes can do better.
Yeah getting the subclasses that don’t have them a spell list would be nice. So would proficiency bonus based abilities as that scales the ability nicely. I actually like the original version except the foes and especially the terrains are too limited. A 4th foe (L1/5/10/15/19) and 5 terrains (L1/4/8/12/16)would really help there. I don’t mind equal or slightly inferior versions of abilities from other classes - as long as 1) they aren’t badly nerfed or given so late they don’t matter; 2) ALL the abilities are not from other classes- the ranger should have it’s own unique something. But then so should all the classes. I don’t mind subclasses from other classes that can do some of what a ranger does (like the scout rogue) but they should never be able to be held up as being “just as good as or better than” a ranger at range ring. They can be nearly as good but clearly in second place. Just as a ranger subclass that mimics that class should be be nearly as good but not equal or superior.
I loved two weapon fighting in older versions but I don’t see coming back like that any time soon sadly.
TWF + Favored Foe is better and cheaper than Dueling/Heavy Weapon/Archery + Hunter’s Mark.
Honestly, I don’t know why people bother so much about this spell:
From levels 1 to 4, Favored Foe is better. From levels 5 onwards, Hunter’s Mark will only pay-off if you focus on a enemy for more than 3 rounds, otherwise you will kill the in 1-2 rounds and then you must use your bonus action to move HM to another target, which is a waste. And you know what? If you know the enemy is strong and it will take time to kill him, it would be better to try to debuff him with Ensnaring Strike or something else. Or cast a spell who actually boosts DPR considerably like Summon Beast or Conjure Animals.
I mean, of course HM has his niche and I can see it being useful for a level 5 Gloomstalker at his first round attacking 3 times with advantage because he is invisible in the dark. But other than that, it’s just an ok spell. It shouldn’t be the only choice for Rangers.
I agree that Hunter's Mark isn't really as good as people make it out to be (I prefer to use it for tracking non-Favored Enemies than for combat,) but it does have one big thing over Favored Foe: duration.
With Favored Foe, once you kill one guy, it's done. You have to use it again to be able to regain its benefits. In tier 1, you get at best three uses of Favored Foe. That's three enemies you can kill with it. Nothing more. This goes up to four by the end of tier 2. You cap out at six enemies you can use it on by level 20. Unless you're doing one encounter a day, a maximum of six uses of Favored Foe is very little, so you have to ration them. Hunter's Mark lasts a minimum of one hour and a maximum of 24, and can be applied to as many enemies as you can squeeze into that timeframe.
TWF + Favored Foe is better and cheaper than Dueling/Heavy Weapon/Archery + Hunter’s Mark.
Honestly, I don’t know why people bother so much about this spell:
From levels 1 to 4, Favored Foe is better. From levels 5 onwards, Hunter’s Mark will only pay-off if you focus on a enemy for more than 3 rounds, otherwise you will kill the in 1-2 rounds and then you must use your bonus action to move HM to another target, which is a waste. And you know what? If you know the enemy is strong and it will take time to kill him, it would be better to try to debuff him with Ensnaring Strike or something else. Or cast a spell who actually boosts DPR considerably like Summon Beast or Conjure Animals.
I mean, of course HM has his niche and I can see it being useful for a level 5 Gloomstalker at his first round attacking 3 times with advantage because he is invisible in the dark. But other than that, it’s just an ok spell. It shouldn’t be the only choice for Rangers.
I have built PHB rangers with and without hunters mark and your right its not an end-all solution. but it can be extremely useful. I have had it up for whole dungeons moving through whole groups of enemies. meaning it can easily last several combats especially when you use stealth and team tactics to work through threats.
TWF also means you cant have a shield if your ac needs it. especially if you want to double down on some of the M.A.D aspects of ranger like boosting intelligence over Constitution or wisdom over dex (or any other stat mix).
I was writing this and then walked away and realized I forgot to hit post. I then saw envoys post. He probably did a better explanation than I just did.
TWF + Favored Foe is better and cheaper than Dueling/Heavy Weapon/Archery + Hunter’s Mark.
Honestly, I don’t know why people bother so much about this spell:
From levels 1 to 4, Favored Foe is better. From levels 5 onwards, Hunter’s Mark will only pay-off if you focus on a enemy for more than 3 rounds, otherwise you will kill the in 1-2 rounds and then you must use your bonus action to move HM to another target, which is a waste. And you know what? If you know the enemy is strong and it will take time to kill him, it would be better to try to debuff him with Ensnaring Strike or something else. Or cast a spell who actually boosts DPR considerably like Summon Beast or Conjure Animals.
I mean, of course HM has his niche and I can see it being useful for a level 5 Gloomstalker at his first round attacking 3 times with advantage because he is invisible in the dark. But other than that, it’s just an ok spell. It shouldn’t be the only choice for Rangers.
I have built PHB rangers with and without hunters mark and your right its not an end-all solution. but it can be extremely useful. I have had it up for whole dungeons moving through whole groups of enemies. meaning it can easily last several combats especially when you use stealth and team tactics to work through threats.
TWF also means you cant have a shield if your ac needs it. especially if you want to double down on some of the M.A.D aspects of ranger like boosting intelligence over Constitution or wisdom over dex (or any other stat mix).
I was writing this and then walked away and realized I forgot to hit post. I then saw envoys post. He probably did a better explanation than I just did.
Yeah I have definately held on to it for several encounters before which make it a VERY good use of a 1st level spell. Most campaigns end by 10th level and there are few other concentration spells worth it before 9th level IMO that are better fits.
Granted now I would do Fey Touched V. Human now if I got a choice to get Bless as I think that is a GREAT spell for rangers.
TWF + Favored Foe is better and cheaper than Dueling/Heavy Weapon/Archery + Hunter’s Mark.
Honestly, I don’t know why people bother so much about this spell:
From levels 1 to 4, Favored Foe is better. From levels 5 onwards, Hunter’s Mark will only pay-off if you focus on a enemy for more than 3 rounds, otherwise you will kill the in 1-2 rounds and then you must use your bonus action to move HM to another target, which is a waste. And you know what? If you know the enemy is strong and it will take time to kill him, it would be better to try to debuff him with Ensnaring Strike or something else. Or cast a spell who actually boosts DPR considerably like Summon Beast or Conjure Animals.
I mean, of course HM has his niche and I can see it being useful for a level 5 Gloomstalker at his first round attacking 3 times with advantage because he is invisible in the dark. But other than that, it’s just an ok spell. It shouldn’t be the only choice for Rangers.
I have built PHB rangers with and without hunters mark and your right its not an end-all solution. but it can be extremely useful. I have had it up for whole dungeons moving through whole groups of enemies. meaning it can easily last several combats especially when you use stealth and team tactics to work through threats.
TWF also means you cant have a shield if your ac needs it. especially if you want to double down on some of the M.A.D aspects of ranger like boosting intelligence over Constitution or wisdom over dex (or any other stat mix).
I was writing this and then walked away and realized I forgot to hit post. I then saw envoys post. He probably did a better explanation than I just did.
For TWF Rangers that lack a huge AC bonus, I find that picking up Mobile and using hit-and-run tactics works wonders.
Get in, hit the target multiple times, and then hide behind the Barbarian. A V-Human can get this going right out of the gate, but for all other races, you can use Zephyr Strike to similar effect until you reach level 4 and can pick up Mobile.
If I'm going Sword & Board, then I take the Defense Fighting Style. Half Plate with a +2 Dex gets you to 17, the Shield gets you to 19, and Defense Fighting Style gets you to 20, which is just one point below a Paladin in full plate with the same setup . Or just go Vuman, pick up Heavy Armor with your free feat, and be just as tanky as the Paladin or Fighter. You can even dump Dex if for some reason you want to.
TWF + Favored Foe is better and cheaper than Dueling/Heavy Weapon/Archery + Hunter’s Mark.
Honestly, I don’t know why people bother so much about this spell:
From levels 1 to 4, Favored Foe is better. From levels 5 onwards, Hunter’s Mark will only pay-off if you focus on a enemy for more than 3 rounds, otherwise you will kill the in 1-2 rounds and then you must use your bonus action to move HM to another target, which is a waste. And you know what? If you know the enemy is strong and it will take time to kill him, it would be better to try to debuff him with Ensnaring Strike or something else. Or cast a spell who actually boosts DPR considerably like Summon Beast or Conjure Animals.
I mean, of course HM has his niche and I can see it being useful for a level 5 Gloomstalker at his first round attacking 3 times with advantage because he is invisible in the dark. But other than that, it’s just an ok spell. It shouldn’t be the only choice for Rangers.
I have built PHB rangers with and without hunters mark and your right its not an end-all solution. but it can be extremely useful. I have had it up for whole dungeons moving through whole groups of enemies. meaning it can easily last several combats especially when you use stealth and team tactics to work through threats.
TWF also means you cant have a shield if your ac needs it. especially if you want to double down on some of the M.A.D aspects of ranger like boosting intelligence over Constitution or wisdom over dex (or any other stat mix).
I was writing this and then walked away and realized I forgot to hit post. I then saw envoys post. He probably did a better explanation than I just did.
For TWF Rangers that lack a huge AC bonus, I find that picking up Mobile and using hit-and-run tactics works wonders.
Get in, hit the target multiple times, and then hide behind the Barbarian. A V-Human can get this going right out of the gate, but for all other races, you can use Zephyr Strike to similar effect until you reach level 4 and can pick up Mobile.
If I'm going Sword & Board, then I take the Defense Fighting Style. Half Plate with a +2 Dex gets you to 17, the Shield gets you to 19, and Defense Fighting Style gets you to 20, which is just one point below a Paladin in full plate with the same setup . Or just go Vuman, pick up Heavy Armor with your free feat, and be just as tanky as the Paladin or Fighter. You can even dump Dex if for some reason you want to.
The only reason for DEX at that point would be if you planned to Multi-class but it works otherwise.
I like 1 level fighter myself for the extra fighting style, heavy armor, CON Save, and heals. I realize that delays your Extra Attack which is big but 6+ I feel it makes the character a lot better especially since you have a lot of concentration based spells at that point.
"Granted now I would do Fey Touched V. Human now if I got a choice to get Bless as I think that is a GREAT spell for rangers. "
Welcome to the bless on Rangers bandwagon. We have plenty of room on this bandwagon, but it is great particularly on a melee Ranger who may spend Round 1 out of range of melee due to starting at 50+ feet out. Or if you can prep. Its just devastating in a fight.
"Granted now I would do Fey Touched V. Human now if I got a choice to get Bless as I think that is a GREAT spell for rangers. "
Welcome to the bless on Rangers bandwagon. We have plenty of room on this bandwagon, but it is great particularly on a melee Ranger who may spend Round 1 out of range of melee due to starting at 50+ feet out. Or if you can prep. Its just devastating in a fight.
Player's won't be happy with their favorite class/subclass/race/etc. until its broken. Even then they will find some level that they don't get everything they wanted.
Even then Ranger will always be difficult, because there are so many different visions of the class to cater to. You will never satisfy all of them with a single class.
Tasha's pushed things in the right direction and gave player's some versatility to execute their image of the Ranger and in general made how they play less dependent on the GM.
That's because, despite protestations, people often don't know what they actually want. They just know, or think they know, that they don't like what's in front of them. Oftentimes it's without even trying it out, which is a childish mentality. How many of us learned to like vegetables because our parents made us eat them growing up?
The ranger never actually trivialized overland movement and the Exploration pillar. That's a lazy criticism, it always was, and it shows a profound lack of understanding of the relevant rules. Which, for the record, aren't even two full pages long. They start at the top of the first column on page 181 of the PHB and end halfway down the first column on page 183. If your table either ignores or changes those rules, then you alter how everyone, and especially the ranger, interacts with the game. And I'm not saying people shouldn't tinker around with the game. I do it all the time. But when we play game designer at home, we need to actually think like one. And that means recognizing how our changes are not necessarily in a vacuum and actually deal with the fallout.
For the record, I'm talking about Natural Explorer. It's ludicrously powerful in subtle ways, letting the ranger multitask when others cannot and gives them additional perks on Ability checks that no one else can duplicate. It even applies to Ability checks with tools, which opens up tons more options that people probably didn't ever consider. It's a domino effect. When you stop caring about one thing, be it apathy or a lack of understanding, you stop caring about the other things which interact with it. And how they might interact with even more things. They cheapen their own experience, and then they have the gall to complain about it as if it wasn't their fault to begin with.
Deft Explorer was throwing these people a bone to gnaw on. And while they almost universally call it "better" because it's not tied to a specific terrain, they're underwhelmed because its boring. And that's because it's an option, a choice. And choices should be meaningful. If it was an actual, obvious upgrade then what's the point?
I’m content to wait.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Yeah might be worth the wait to see how they balance other things.
I am 99% sure that I can no longer see what your post is referring to. LOL!
Many multiclass builds can in some way mimic what others classes can do. Isn't that why folks multiclass? If someone's idea of what a ranger is happens to be a sneaky person with a bow and arrows, than by all means please play a fighter/rogue. Or...barbarian...for some reason.
On improving the ranger, as the subclass is doing so much of the heavy lifting for the class wouldn't it just be better to have the player pick the archetype/conclave at first or second level.
I didn't read all 6 pages, but I know it was mentioned that Tasha's did a great job helping to smooth out most of the issues the community has with the Ranger.
Really the only 'fixes' at this point I want are to update all subclasses to have spell list, this would include redoing some, but not all of the existing list, so that they do not overlap and that they can include newer spells and to make Hunter's Mark a feature, not a spell - figure out a chart like sneak attack so that it has some degree of scaling. Finally, and this applies to all classes - make a capstone that is actually valuable.
As an aside, rework all of the subclasses (not just Ranger) to model them after the newer designs (doing things like basing abilities off of proficiency bonus and not an ability score) and to modernize features that are bad versions of what other classes can do better.
Yeah getting the subclasses that don’t have them a spell list would be nice. So would proficiency bonus based abilities as that scales the ability nicely. I actually like the original version except the foes and especially the terrains are too limited. A 4th foe (L1/5/10/15/19) and 5 terrains (L1/4/8/12/16)would really help there. I don’t mind equal or slightly inferior versions of abilities from other classes - as long as 1) they aren’t badly nerfed or given so late they don’t matter; 2) ALL the abilities are not from other classes- the ranger should have it’s own unique something. But then so should all the classes. I don’t mind subclasses from other classes that can do some of what a ranger does (like the scout rogue) but they should never be able to be held up as being “just as good as or better than” a ranger at range ring. They can be nearly as good but clearly in second place. Just as a ranger subclass that mimics that class should be be nearly as good but not equal or superior.
I loved two weapon fighting in older versions but I don’t see coming back like that any time soon sadly.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
TWF + Favored Foe is better and cheaper than Dueling/Heavy Weapon/Archery + Hunter’s Mark.
Honestly, I don’t know why people bother so much about this spell:
From levels 1 to 4, Favored Foe is better.
From levels 5 onwards, Hunter’s Mark will only pay-off if you focus on a enemy for more than 3 rounds, otherwise you will kill the in 1-2 rounds and then you must use your bonus action to move HM to another target, which is a waste.
And you know what? If you know the enemy is strong and it will take time to kill him, it would be better to try to debuff him with Ensnaring Strike or something else. Or cast a spell who actually boosts DPR considerably like Summon Beast or Conjure Animals.
I mean, of course HM has his niche and I can see it being useful for a level 5 Gloomstalker at his first round attacking 3 times with advantage because he is invisible in the dark. But other than that, it’s just an ok spell. It shouldn’t be the only choice for Rangers.
I agree that Hunter's Mark isn't really as good as people make it out to be (I prefer to use it for tracking non-Favored Enemies than for combat,) but it does have one big thing over Favored Foe: duration.
With Favored Foe, once you kill one guy, it's done. You have to use it again to be able to regain its benefits. In tier 1, you get at best three uses of Favored Foe. That's three enemies you can kill with it. Nothing more. This goes up to four by the end of tier 2. You cap out at six enemies you can use it on by level 20. Unless you're doing one encounter a day, a maximum of six uses of Favored Foe is very little, so you have to ration them. Hunter's Mark lasts a minimum of one hour and a maximum of 24, and can be applied to as many enemies as you can squeeze into that timeframe.
So that's something to think about.
I have built PHB rangers with and without hunters mark and your right its not an end-all solution. but it can be extremely useful. I have had it up for whole dungeons moving through whole groups of enemies. meaning it can easily last several combats especially when you use stealth and team tactics to work through threats.
TWF also means you cant have a shield if your ac needs it. especially if you want to double down on some of the M.A.D aspects of ranger like boosting intelligence over Constitution or wisdom over dex (or any other stat mix).
I was writing this and then walked away and realized I forgot to hit post. I then saw envoys post. He probably did a better explanation than I just did.
Yeah I have definately held on to it for several encounters before which make it a VERY good use of a 1st level spell. Most campaigns end by 10th level and there are few other concentration spells worth it before 9th level IMO that are better fits.
Granted now I would do Fey Touched V. Human now if I got a choice to get Bless as I think that is a GREAT spell for rangers.
For TWF Rangers that lack a huge AC bonus, I find that picking up Mobile and using hit-and-run tactics works wonders.
Get in, hit the target multiple times, and then hide behind the Barbarian. A V-Human can get this going right out of the gate, but for all other races, you can use Zephyr Strike to similar effect until you reach level 4 and can pick up Mobile.
If I'm going Sword & Board, then I take the Defense Fighting Style. Half Plate with a +2 Dex gets you to 17, the Shield gets you to 19, and Defense Fighting Style gets you to 20, which is just one point below a Paladin in full plate with the same setup . Or just go Vuman, pick up Heavy Armor with your free feat, and be just as tanky as the Paladin or Fighter. You can even dump Dex if for some reason you want to.
The only reason for DEX at that point would be if you planned to Multi-class but it works otherwise.
I like 1 level fighter myself for the extra fighting style, heavy armor, CON Save, and heals. I realize that delays your Extra Attack which is big but 6+ I feel it makes the character a lot better especially since you have a lot of concentration based spells at that point.
"Granted now I would do Fey Touched V. Human now if I got a choice to get Bless as I think that is a GREAT spell for rangers. "
Welcome to the bless on Rangers bandwagon. We have plenty of room on this bandwagon, but it is great particularly on a melee Ranger who may spend Round 1 out of range of melee due to starting at 50+ feet out. Or if you can prep. Its just devastating in a fight.
Gladly jump on this wagon!
Melee Rangers need to make a comeback!
It sounds like Tasha's didn't "do the trick" for everyone after all.
I would say it did so more often than it didn't....and if you enjoyed the PHB ranger already why would you use Tasha's anyway?
I have used Tasha's a couple of times now. It's fine.
Player's won't be happy with their favorite class/subclass/race/etc. until its broken. Even then they will find some level that they don't get everything they wanted.
Even then Ranger will always be difficult, because there are so many different visions of the class to cater to. You will never satisfy all of them with a single class.
Tasha's pushed things in the right direction and gave player's some versatility to execute their image of the Ranger and in general made how they play less dependent on the GM.
That's because, despite protestations, people often don't know what they actually want. They just know, or think they know, that they don't like what's in front of them. Oftentimes it's without even trying it out, which is a childish mentality. How many of us learned to like vegetables because our parents made us eat them growing up?
The ranger never actually trivialized overland movement and the Exploration pillar. That's a lazy criticism, it always was, and it shows a profound lack of understanding of the relevant rules. Which, for the record, aren't even two full pages long. They start at the top of the first column on page 181 of the PHB and end halfway down the first column on page 183. If your table either ignores or changes those rules, then you alter how everyone, and especially the ranger, interacts with the game. And I'm not saying people shouldn't tinker around with the game. I do it all the time. But when we play game designer at home, we need to actually think like one. And that means recognizing how our changes are not necessarily in a vacuum and actually deal with the fallout.
For the record, I'm talking about Natural Explorer. It's ludicrously powerful in subtle ways, letting the ranger multitask when others cannot and gives them additional perks on Ability checks that no one else can duplicate. It even applies to Ability checks with tools, which opens up tons more options that people probably didn't ever consider. It's a domino effect. When you stop caring about one thing, be it apathy or a lack of understanding, you stop caring about the other things which interact with it. And how they might interact with even more things. They cheapen their own experience, and then they have the gall to complain about it as if it wasn't their fault to begin with.
Deft Explorer was throwing these people a bone to gnaw on. And while they almost universally call it "better" because it's not tied to a specific terrain, they're underwhelmed because its boring. And that's because it's an option, a choice. And choices should be meaningful. If it was an actual, obvious upgrade then what's the point?
Sorry for the rant.
I agree. The optional features in Tasha's are meant to be equal "power" options. Not upgrades.
I also agree that many people don't know what they want or not.