in response to franks request to switch abilities: sure. That was just one example. the point was you can do alot by sticking close to the same original but just minor updates to make it functional at all tables.
HIPS is only one of several that need rewrites. I will say that the new one looses things I like, Ambush potential and non-magic to beat spells and special senses but the new one is also really strong.
another question would be how to make natural explorer and favored terrain less dm dependent but still have the Favored enemy feel?
I suggest due to their study of a foe they are allowed to once per day give themselves advantage on any wisdom or intelligence check. uses of this ability do not count if a favored enemy is the target or source of the skill.
a similar thing could be done for terrain.
this would allow at least once per day a ranger to spend both their "functional expertise" and "advantage" then the player could choose to blow it all at once or split them up.
an improved TWF just for rangers (we don’t get GWF so fighters shouldn’t get our TWF) - one possibility is changing the ability for rangers to include the dual wielding feat so you can do more than a D6 damage on 1 attack from the get go..
thoughts any one?
I think TWF is the one area where there will be a major rewrite. there is a chance it might scale with level like cantrips. making it part of the ranger niche sounds good to me as many iconic rangers use it. even though I prefer ranged attacks.
I always felt rangers got the better end any way with TWF because they could use huntersmark with it at low levels. many people have expressed (to me) narrative/theming problems going from TWF as major damage to unusable at late levels. it felt to them like a different character. I never had that problem.
honestly I think TWF is a whole different thread and only tangential to ranger but it should be fixed I just cant say how.
in response to franks request to switch abilities: sure. That was just one example. the point was you can do alot by sticking close to the same original but just minor updates to make it functional at all tables.
HIPS is only one of several that need rewrites. I will say that the new one looses things I like, Ambush potential and non-magic to beat spells and special senses but the new one is also really strong.
another question would be how to make natural explorer and favored terrain less dm dependent but still have the Favored enemy feel?
I suggest due to their study of a foe they are allowed to once per day give themselves advantage on any wisdom or intelligence check. uses of this ability do not count if a favored enemy is the target or source of the skill.
a similar thing could be done for terrain.
this would allow at least once per day a ranger to spend both their "functional expertise" and "advantage" then the player could choose to blow it all at once or split them up.
Agree with this...make them the ones who can hunt monsters and understand terrain better than the rest. I would make it so you can get ADV on recalling information on creatures you have marked with Favored Foe or Hunters Mark.
an improved TWF just for rangers (we don’t get GWF so fighters shouldn’t get our TWF) - one possibility is changing the ability for rangers to include the dual wielding feat so you can do more than a D6 damage on 1 attack from the get go..
thoughts any one?
I think TWF is the one area where there will be a major rewrite. there is a chance it might scale with level like cantrips. making it part of the ranger niche sounds good to me as many iconic rangers use it. even though I prefer ranged attacks.
I always felt rangers got the better end any way with TWF because they could use huntersmark with it at low levels. many people have expressed (to me) narrative/theming problems going from TWF as major damage to unusable at late levels. it felt to them like a different character. I never had that problem.
honestly I think TWF is a whole different thread and only tangential to ranger but it should be fixed I just cant say how.
Ironically, using TWF with Hunter's Mark is going to be a loss of DPR a lot of the time. You typically need to trigger HM 3-5 times (depending on overall power level of the off-hand attack) per time you reapply it for it to have any value. That's not even counting the spellslot and concentration it costs. Rule of thumb? Only combine TWF and HM on enemies with high HP you can expect to survive for at least 2 rounds.
And, yeah, TWF needs some love overall. I think adding a couple of feats to up its damage would be an easy fix, but hey ho.
I would love it if TWF was worded just like the hunter ranger’s colossus slayer or horde breaker. Make a weapon attack? Free attack with a weapon in your other hand. Something like that.
That being said, two weapon fighting isn’t too bad at higher levels. Fighters get 4 attacks at level 11. Barbarians can rage on turn one, and two weapon fight for the rest of the battle. Rangers can cast hunter’s mark on turn one and ride that out with three attacks against the BBEG for the rest of the combat.
If we don’t compare it to GWM, and instead sword and shield, it holds up.
in response to franks request to switch abilities: sure. That was just one example. the point was you can do alot by sticking close to the same original but just minor updates to make it functional at all tables.
HIPS is only one of several that need rewrites. I will say that the new one looses things I like, Ambush potential and non-magic to beat spells and special senses but the new one is also really strong.
another question would be how to make natural explorer and favored terrain less dm dependent but still have the Favored enemy feel?
I suggest due to their study of a foe they are allowed to once per day give themselves advantage on any wisdom or intelligence check. uses of this ability do not count if a favored enemy is the target or source of the skill.
a similar thing could be done for terrain.
this would allow at least once per day a ranger to spend both their "functional expertise" and "advantage" then the player could choose to blow it all at once or split them up.
Agree with this...make them the ones who can hunt monsters and understand terrain better than the rest. I would make it so you can get ADV on recalling information on creatures you have marked with Favored Foe or Hunters Mark.
the way you say it sounds like getting favored foe and favored enemy(rewrite) at the same time. this is a huge deal probably wont happen. I am not even sure it should happen. as my re-write is already more powerful than the standard one.
That works for me as well. Now for some catch up thoughts after I’ve gotten some of the Xmas decorations up: 1) Tom I actually like your rewrite of the basic ranger abilities - but I doubt they will do something like that. favored Enemy and Terrain have been with us since at least 2e (I think 1e but I’ve been wrong once or twice😳). They have played with them every edition so it’s possible they would tweak it offering some way to get more of each.
Seems obvious to me, both in flavor and gameplay, that a sufficiently experienced Ranger could apply what they know of hunting and all of that to more than just a few environments. This would also let WotC make Favored Enemy/Natural Explorer type abilities be more central to the design without running into some of the problems from earlier editions where Ranger damage depended more on it.
2) the ideas for new subclasses are good, that looks like the main way WOtC is trying to shift things - maybe we should open a thread just to discuss possible different subclasses we have created or would like to see.
The basic features of the Ranger as it is now sometimes feel unintentionally brilliant in that, while it definitely had a lot of problems originally, virtually everything could be fixed with archetypes (and an expanded spell list, obviously). Now I just think we need a couple more to round out the last few ways we could diversify the class.
3) we in the ranger forum are at least as diverse in our vision of what a ranger is/can be as the ranger characters we play. We need to be a bit more open to the other views and ways of playing. No class is perfect and while some of us can and do play rangers to high levels and find the PHB ranger to be very good on its own, optional tweaks (like those from Tasha’s) can be nice for other builds or other styles of play so they are worth at least discussing and experiment with.
I just meant that even with the often underused features from the PHB, the newer archetypes usually makes up for it, not that we shouldn't consider other options we've gotten.
an improved TWF just for rangers (we don’t get GWF so fighters shouldn’t get our TWF) - one possibility is changing the ability for rangers to include the dual wielding feat so you can do more than a D6 damage on 1 attack from the get go..
thoughts any one?
I think Fighters should have TWF available to them; part of their class fantasy is that they can master virtually any fighting style. But I wouldn't mind Rangers getting something unique to them for TWF. The problem with TWF seems to be scaling after Extra Attack comes online.
I would love it if TWF was worded just like the hunter ranger’s colossus slayer or horde breaker. Make a weapon attack? Free attack with a weapon in your other hand. Something like that.
That being said, two weapon fighting isn’t too bad at higher levels. Fighters get 4 attacks at level 11. Barbarians can rage on turn one, and two weapon fight for the rest of the battle. Rangers can cast hunter’s mark on turn one and ride that out with three attacks against the BBEG for the rest of the combat.
If we don’t compare it to GWM, and instead sword and shield, it holds up.
I think the problem is a lack of feat support more than anything. 2handed weapons are so powerful precisely because of options like GWM and, especially, PAM. PAM doesn't just increase your damage; it meaningfully expands your action economy to better use both your bonus action and reaction.
You master fighting with two weapons, gaining the following benefits:
You gain a +2 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand.
You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren’t light. Moreover, the additional attack with your other hand no longer consumes your bonus action.
You can draw or stow two one-handed weapons when you would normally be able to draw or stow only one.
You master fighting with two weapons, gaining the following benefits:
You gain a +2 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand.
You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren’t light. Moreover, the additional attack with your other hand no longer consumes your bonus action.
You can draw or stow two one-handed weapons when you would normally be able to draw or stow only one.
I also think a new TWF feat shouldn't overlap that much with the Dual Wielder feat from the PHB.
Maybe a feat based around a combat manouver? Inifite use, takes one of your attacks on your attack action, 1 per turn?
This one isn't considered for damage, but could be possible:
Two Weapon Master: You've mastered the art of fighting with two weapons. Once per turn when taking the attack action and wielding two light weapons (any 2 one-handed with the dual wielder feat, obviously), you can choose one of the following benefits: Until the start of your next turn, you can add a 1d4 to... ... damage ... to hit ... AC Swapping to different weapons removes this benefit.
Some historical musings on TWF - the most obvious historical example of course was the Renaissance rapier and dagger. I don’t think anyone ever actually tried to fight with 2 longsword (I’ve tried practicing with with 2 katanas and even moving slowly to figure out attacks and defenses I nearly took my leg and arm off. Practicing with shorter swords (khyber “knives”) proved much easier.) other examples I have seen or read about are the Chinese “butterfly” knives/swords, the Japanese sais which while not exactly swords work mechanically like swords by and large and the germanics and saxons who sometimes fought 2 handed with short swords (the sax “knife” that gave the saxons their name) or hand axes. So it’s not exactly a common occurrence historically. Historically (and my own personal attempts) show that it is, as described in the PHB most typically uses 2 light weapons but can be done with a longer and a shorter weapon. The use of the two weapons does “weave” a defense around the wielder that, while not as good as a shield is better than nothing so the +1 AC is reasonable but A +2 might be a bit much. A video someone suggested a few months ago was pointing out that for a ranger in the wilderness battle axes and long swords (let alone great weapons and pole arms) just get in the way and are ineffective in brush cutting etc while a shorter sword like a machete/falchion works far better. On the other hand a long sword is a better tool for combat. So a TWF ranger would probably have one of each for use. This why I would like to see the ranger’s initial TWF them to start with both and not need the dual weapon fighting feat unless they wanted to use something like dual long swords. By getting their proficiency and stat bonus on both attacks their damage would be ((1D8+1D6+2SB) (about 10 points a round) L2-4. At 5-10 it would be 2D8+1D6+3SB or typically 20 points if they use both attacks and the bonus action. Another option might be to steal the text from GWF and allow the ranger (and fighter?) to reroll damage that gets a 1/2. Side note - since we are starting to recognize that the ranger isn’t just Robinhood why can’t the ranger get GWF like the fighter?
Using two weapons, one in each hand, allows for many quick, but lightly hitting, attacks. Yes, with some added defensive boost. Mechanically the big issue for rangers, monks, rogues, and barbarians is the bonus action economy. So just decoupling the additional other hand attack from the bonus action would do wonders for those classes mechanically.
You master fighting with two weapons, gaining the following benefits:
You gain a +2 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand.
You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren’t light. Moreover, the additional attack with your other hand no longer consumes your bonus action.
You can draw or stow two one-handed weapons when you would normally be able to draw or stow only one.
I like this. It is perhaps powergaming but would like more and a question - does this mean you would actually get 4 attacks (2 main and 2 offhand ) when you get to attack twice at L5? I would like to eliminate the ranger’s need to take dual wielding unless you really wanted to do 2 long swords/rapier/etc. if you combined this with my idea that the ranger could wield 1 larger 1 handed weapon and one light weapon with this I think you would have a great ability for a ranger that might actually match the fighter’s GWF + GWM + PAM sequence. Leave the fighter with the standard TWF and the 2 feats, one to get a single longer weapon and a second to get double long weapons but always using the bonus action. The fighter can sort of duplicate the ranger’s special fighting style but not quite and he has something “better” if he wants it (along with lots more ASIs in which to get it.
You master fighting with two weapons, gaining the following benefits:
You gain a +2 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand.
You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren’t light. Moreover, the additional attack with your other hand no longer consumes your bonus action.
You can draw or stow two one-handed weapons when you would normally be able to draw or stow only one.
I like this. It is perhaps powergaming but would like more and a question - does this mean you would actually get 4 attacks (2 main and 2 offhand ) when you get to attack twice at L5? I would like to eliminate the ranger’s need to take dual wielding unless you really wanted to do 2 long swords/rapier/etc. if you combined this with my idea that the ranger could wield 1 larger 1 handed weapon and one light weapon with this I think you would have a great ability for a ranger that might actually match the fighter’s GWF + GWM + PAM sequence. Leave the fighter with the standard TWF and the 2 feats, one to get a single longer weapon and a second to get double long weapons but always using the bonus action. The fighter can sort of duplicate the ranger’s special fighting style but not quite and he has something “better” if he wants it (along with lots more ASIs in which to get it.
To me ranger is the better TWF until level 11 anyway. The idea of the feat is same amount of attacks, just with quicker draw, AC boost, bigger weapons, and less action economy to do so. This feat would benefit rangers, monks, barbarians, and rogues more so than strength based classes.
I don’t use this. It’s just a submission for this thread.
TWF style or the feat could just be something like “Once per turn when you make a melee weapon attack with a light weapon you are holding in one hand you can make a melee weapon attack with a light weapon you are holding in the other hand.”
Here’s my submission for an update to favored enemy.
Favored Enemy
Beginning at 1st level, you have significant experience studying, tracking, hunting, and even talking to a certain type of enemy.
Choose a type of favored enemy: aberrations, beasts, celestials, constructs, dragons, elementals, fey, fiends, giants, monstrosities, oozes, plants, or undead. Alternatively, you can select two races of humanoid (such as gnolls and orcs) as favored enemies.
You have advantage on Wisdom (Survival) checks to track your favored enemies, as well as on Intelligence checks to recall information about them, and on any attacks rolls made against them.
When you gain this feature, you also learn one language of your choice that is spoken by your favored enemies, if they speak one at all.
You choose one additional favored enemy, as well as an associated language, at 6th and 14th level. As you gain levels, your choices should reflect the types of monsters you have encountered on your adventures.
You become particularly familiar with one type of environment after spending time in it, and are adept at traveling and surviving in it. After spending at least 8 hours in one of the following environments: arctic, coast, desert, forest, hills, open water, grassland, mountain, swamp, urban, or the Underdark, it becomes familiar to you and you gain the ability to add your wisdom modifier to any ability check you make while in it. Moreover, when traveling for an hour or more in this familiar environment, you gain the following benefits:
Difficult terrain doesn’t slow your group’s travel.
Your group can’t become lost except by magical means.
Even when you are engaged in another activity while traveling (such as foraging, navigating, or tracking), you remain alert to danger.
If you are traveling alone, you can move stealthily at a normal pace.
When you forage, you find twice as much food as you normally would.
While tracking other creatures, you also learn their exact number, their sizes, and how long ago they passed through the area.
These abilities last until you spend at least 8 hours in a different environment, at which point you replace your familiarity of the previous environment with the new one. At 6th and 10th level you gain the ability to become familiar with an additional environment at the same time. When you spend 8 hours in a new environment, you choose which previous familiar environment to replace.
I like the advantage on attack rolls but your still limited to 4(max) out of 13. Granted you can probably make sure you have the main you’ll need between session zero and later clues but cutting down the list or increasing the number would be nice.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
in response to franks request to switch abilities: sure. That was just one example. the point was you can do alot by sticking close to the same original but just minor updates to make it functional at all tables.
HIPS is only one of several that need rewrites. I will say that the new one looses things I like, Ambush potential and non-magic to beat spells and special senses but the new one is also really strong.
another question would be how to make natural explorer and favored terrain less dm dependent but still have the Favored enemy feel?
I suggest due to their study of a foe they are allowed to once per day give themselves advantage on any wisdom or intelligence check. uses of this ability do not count if a favored enemy is the target or source of the skill.
a similar thing could be done for terrain.
this would allow at least once per day a ranger to spend both their "functional expertise" and "advantage" then the player could choose to blow it all at once or split them up.
I think TWF is the one area where there will be a major rewrite. there is a chance it might scale with level like cantrips. making it part of the ranger niche sounds good to me as many iconic rangers use it. even though I prefer ranged attacks.
I always felt rangers got the better end any way with TWF because they could use huntersmark with it at low levels. many people have expressed (to me) narrative/theming problems going from TWF as major damage to unusable at late levels. it felt to them like a different character. I never had that problem.
honestly I think TWF is a whole different thread and only tangential to ranger but it should be fixed I just cant say how.
Agree with this...make them the ones who can hunt monsters and understand terrain better than the rest. I would make it so you can get ADV on recalling information on creatures you have marked with Favored Foe or Hunters Mark.
Ironically, using TWF with Hunter's Mark is going to be a loss of DPR a lot of the time. You typically need to trigger HM 3-5 times (depending on overall power level of the off-hand attack) per time you reapply it for it to have any value. That's not even counting the spellslot and concentration it costs. Rule of thumb? Only combine TWF and HM on enemies with high HP you can expect to survive for at least 2 rounds.
And, yeah, TWF needs some love overall. I think adding a couple of feats to up its damage would be an easy fix, but hey ho.
I would love it if TWF was worded just like the hunter ranger’s colossus slayer or horde breaker. Make a weapon attack? Free attack with a weapon in your other hand. Something like that.
That being said, two weapon fighting isn’t too bad at higher levels. Fighters get 4 attacks at level 11. Barbarians can rage on turn one, and two weapon fight for the rest of the battle. Rangers can cast hunter’s mark on turn one and ride that out with three attacks against the BBEG for the rest of the combat.
If we don’t compare it to GWM, and instead sword and shield, it holds up.
the way you say it sounds like getting favored foe and favored enemy(rewrite) at the same time. this is a huge deal probably wont happen. I am not even sure it should happen. as my re-write is already more powerful than the standard one.
Seems obvious to me, both in flavor and gameplay, that a sufficiently experienced Ranger could apply what they know of hunting and all of that to more than just a few environments. This would also let WotC make Favored Enemy/Natural Explorer type abilities be more central to the design without running into some of the problems from earlier editions where Ranger damage depended more on it.
The basic features of the Ranger as it is now sometimes feel unintentionally brilliant in that, while it definitely had a lot of problems originally, virtually everything could be fixed with archetypes (and an expanded spell list, obviously). Now I just think we need a couple more to round out the last few ways we could diversify the class.
I just meant that even with the often underused features from the PHB, the newer archetypes usually makes up for it, not that we shouldn't consider other options we've gotten.
I think Fighters should have TWF available to them; part of their class fantasy is that they can master virtually any fighting style. But I wouldn't mind Rangers getting something unique to them for TWF. The problem with TWF seems to be scaling after Extra Attack comes online.
I think the problem is a lack of feat support more than anything. 2handed weapons are so powerful precisely because of options like GWM and, especially, PAM. PAM doesn't just increase your damage; it meaningfully expands your action economy to better use both your bonus action and reaction.
Oh! That’s easy!
You master fighting with two weapons, gaining the following benefits:
I also think a new TWF feat shouldn't overlap that much with the Dual Wielder feat from the PHB.
Maybe a feat based around a combat manouver? Inifite use, takes one of your attacks on your attack action, 1 per turn?
This one isn't considered for damage, but could be possible:
Two Weapon Master: You've mastered the art of fighting with two weapons. Once per turn when taking the attack action and wielding two light weapons (any 2 one-handed with the dual wielder feat, obviously), you can choose one of the following benefits: Until the start of your next turn, you can add a 1d4 to...
... damage
... to hit
... AC
Swapping to different weapons removes this benefit.
Some historical musings on TWF - the most obvious historical example of course was the Renaissance rapier and dagger. I don’t think anyone ever actually tried to fight with 2 longsword (I’ve tried practicing with with 2 katanas and even moving slowly to figure out attacks and defenses I nearly took my leg and arm off. Practicing with shorter swords (khyber “knives”) proved much easier.) other examples I have seen or read about are the Chinese “butterfly” knives/swords, the Japanese sais which while not exactly swords work mechanically like swords by and large and the germanics and saxons who sometimes fought 2 handed with short swords (the sax “knife” that gave the saxons their name) or hand axes. So it’s not exactly a common occurrence historically. Historically (and my own personal attempts) show that it is, as described in the PHB most typically uses 2 light weapons but can be done with a longer and a shorter weapon. The use of the two weapons does “weave” a defense around the wielder that, while not as good as a shield is better than nothing so the +1 AC is reasonable but A +2 might be a bit much. A video someone suggested a few months ago was pointing out that for a ranger in the wilderness battle axes and long swords (let alone great weapons and pole arms) just get in the way and are ineffective in brush cutting etc while a shorter sword like a machete/falchion works far better. On the other hand a long sword is a better tool for combat. So a TWF ranger would probably have one of each for use. This why I would like to see the ranger’s initial TWF them to start with both and not need the dual weapon fighting feat unless they wanted to use something like dual long swords. By getting their proficiency and stat bonus on both attacks their damage would be ((1D8+1D6+2SB) (about 10 points a round) L2-4. At 5-10 it would be 2D8+1D6+3SB or typically 20 points if they use both attacks and the bonus action. Another option might be to steal the text from GWF and allow the ranger (and fighter?) to reroll damage that gets a 1/2.
Side note - since we are starting to recognize that the ranger isn’t just Robinhood why can’t the ranger get GWF like the fighter?
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
I watched that video. Pretty interesting.
Using two weapons, one in each hand, allows for many quick, but lightly hitting, attacks. Yes, with some added defensive boost. Mechanically the big issue for rangers, monks, rogues, and barbarians is the bonus action economy. So just decoupling the additional other hand attack from the bonus action would do wonders for those classes mechanically.
I would just allow the extra attack as part of your action if you took the twf style.
Also I've heard that some people take the slasher/crusher feats and debuff with both in a turn.
I like this. It is perhaps powergaming but would like more and a question - does this mean you would actually get 4 attacks (2 main and 2 offhand ) when you get to attack twice at L5?
I would like to eliminate the ranger’s need to take dual wielding unless you really wanted to do 2 long swords/rapier/etc. if you combined this with my idea that the ranger could wield 1 larger 1 handed weapon and one light weapon with this I think you would have a great ability for a ranger that might actually match the fighter’s GWF + GWM + PAM sequence. Leave the fighter with the standard TWF and the 2 feats, one to get a single longer weapon and a second to get double long weapons but always using the bonus action. The fighter can sort of duplicate the ranger’s special fighting style but not quite and he has something “better” if he wants it (along with lots more ASIs in which to get it.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
To me ranger is the better TWF until level 11 anyway. The idea of the feat is same amount of attacks, just with quicker draw, AC boost, bigger weapons, and less action economy to do so. This feat would benefit rangers, monks, barbarians, and rogues more so than strength based classes.
I don’t use this. It’s just a submission for this thread.
TWF style or the feat could just be something like “Once per turn when you make a melee weapon attack with a light weapon you are holding in one hand you can make a melee weapon attack with a light weapon you are holding in the other hand.”
I figured it was a submission - thank you for it
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Here’s my submission for an update to favored enemy.
Favored Enemy
Beginning at 1st level, you have significant experience studying, tracking, hunting, and even talking to a certain type of enemy.
Choose a type of favored enemy: aberrations, beasts, celestials, constructs, dragons, elementals, fey, fiends, giants, monstrosities, oozes, plants, or undead. Alternatively, you can select two races of humanoid (such as gnolls and orcs) as favored enemies.
You have advantage on Wisdom (Survival) checks to track your favored enemies, as well as on Intelligence checks to recall information about them, and on any attacks rolls made against them.
When you gain this feature, you also learn one language of your choice that is spoken by your favored enemies, if they speak one at all.
You choose one additional favored enemy, as well as an associated language, at 6th and 14th level. As you gain levels, your choices should reflect the types of monsters you have encountered on your adventures.
And for natural explorer.
Natural Explorer
You become particularly familiar with one type of environment after spending time in it, and are adept at traveling and surviving in it. After spending at least 8 hours in one of the following environments: arctic, coast, desert, forest, hills, open water, grassland, mountain, swamp, urban, or the Underdark, it becomes familiar to you and you gain the ability to add your wisdom modifier to any ability check you make while in it. Moreover, when traveling for an hour or more in this familiar environment, you gain the following benefits:
These abilities last until you spend at least 8 hours in a different environment, at which point you replace your familiarity of the previous environment with the new one. At 6th and 10th level you gain the ability to become familiar with an additional environment at the same time. When you spend 8 hours in a new environment, you choose which previous familiar environment to replace.
I like the advantage on attack rolls but your still limited to 4(max) out of 13. Granted you can probably make sure you have the main you’ll need between session zero and later clues but cutting down the list or increasing the number would be nice.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.