The most recent outrage that has put me firmly into the prepared caster team is when I realized that 1/3rd casters know more spells.
I simply don't understand the purpose of that choice.
IMHO, quality of spells available at the time available.
I would disagree with that as the other casters get spells that are just as impactful IMO.
The limitation of the spell schools is somewhat harsh but a fighter getting Shield and a Rogue getting Find Familar at early levels is really good. Later on the fighter can pick up some really sustainable defensive options or like the rogue pick up Booming Blade and Shadowblade which is hugely impactful to the build.
Overall they get the wizard spell list which is not only one of the best to start with its also the one that keeps getting things added to it more and more.
The simple fact the 1/3rd casters get cantrips alone while the ranger doesn't is a pretty big slap to me honestly...the fact the ranger has to give up a fighting style to get some druid cantrips is not a good exchange IMO.
The most recent outrage that has put me firmly into the prepared caster team is when I realized that 1/3rd casters know more spells.
I simply don't understand the purpose of that choice.
IMHO, quality of spells available at the time available.
I would disagree with that as the other casters get spells that are just as impactful IMO.
The limitation of the spell schools is somewhat harsh but a fighter getting Shield and a Rogue getting Find Familar at early levels is really good. Later on the fighter can pick up some really sustainable defensive options or like the rogue pick up Booming Blade and Shadowblade which is hugely impactful to the build.
Overall they get the wizard spell list which is not only one of the best to start with its also the one that keeps getting things added to it more and more.
The simple fact the 1/3rd casters get cantrips alone while the ranger doesn't is a pretty big slap to me honestly...the fact the ranger has to give up a fighting style to get some druid cantrips is not a good exchange IMO.
They are good subclasses. Yes. Very impactful. Different though. And the levels they get spells at and how many of them cast is worth noting as well.
The most recent outrage that has put me firmly into the prepared caster team is when I realized that 1/3rd casters know more spells.
I simply don't understand the purpose of that choice.
IMHO, quality of spells available at the time available.
I would disagree with that as the other casters get spells that are just as impactful IMO.
The limitation of the spell schools is somewhat harsh but a fighter getting Shield and a Rogue getting Find Familar at early levels is really good. Later on the fighter can pick up some really sustainable defensive options or like the rogue pick up Booming Blade and Shadowblade which is hugely impactful to the build.
Overall they get the wizard spell list which is not only one of the best to start with its also the one that keeps getting things added to it more and more.
The simple fact the 1/3rd casters get cantrips alone while the ranger doesn't is a pretty big slap to me honestly...the fact the ranger has to give up a fighting style to get some druid cantrips is not a good exchange IMO.
They are good subclasses. Yes. Very impactful. Different though. And the levels they get spells at and how many of them cast is worth noting as well.
Its a sad thing that people forget about scrolls. Just having the spell on a your classes list means you can use scrolls. many of the more situational ranger spells can be saved for a while until absolutly nessicary. since they max out at 5th level that means the desirable scrolls are on the cheaper side in comparison to what full casters work for. My only problem was when they changed the rules to require archana to craft scrolls. especially since the ranger spells are very diffrent from typical casters (with nature/ semi mundane themes). rangers also have one of the best free time features meaning they should be able to craft scrolls while traveling and still maintain watch.
Here is a video on the topic from Pack tactics. I dont always agree with his logic and "applied math" but on this vid on scrolls is rather good. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYPIRZ5pTQM
Ummm, there are really only 2 models for prepared casters - cleric model where you all the spells but have to prep a smaller list for actually casting and then can change any you want after a long rest. The other is the Wizard model where you have the spells you know written down in your spellbook and then have to memorize the ones you select to be able to cast and can then change them after a long rest.
I respectfully disagree. Every single class with access to spellcasting makes use of it differently.
Bards know their spells, they don't prepare them, can cast eligible spells as rituals, and use musical instruments as their spellcasting focus.
Clerics prepare their spells, a number equal to their class level plus their spellcasting ability modifier, may cast eligible spells as rituals, automatically know spells from their chosen divine domain, and use a holy symbol as their spellcasting focus
Druids are very similar to clerics, but their subclasses do not all grant bonus spells and they use a druidic focus
Paladins are almost the same as clerics, save for preparing a number of spells equal to half their class level plus spellcasting ability modifier and using a different ability
Rangers know their spells, like bards, but cannot cast eligible ones as rituals, and may use a druidic focus
Sorcerers know their spells, like bards, and use the same spellcasting ability as bards, but cannot cast as rituals and use an arcane focus
Wizards prepare a number of spells equal to clerics and druids, may cast rituals from their spellbook without preparing them in advance, and use an arcane focus like a sorcerer
And warlocks are just special.
So, sorry, but I find it weird that you would say there only two models. Rather deliberately, every single class takes a different approach to spellcasting.
Two models of PREPARED SPELL CASTING not of spell casting in general and trying to separate out models based on getting extra spells for subclasses or Druidic vs clerical vs arcane foci is, to me, ridiculous. For prepared casters the key difference is whether you “know” all the spells and select the ones you want to “memorize” or you have a bunch of spells written down and you memorize a selected subset for use that day. In the first case you can’t loose access to your spells while in the second you can ( by loosing your spellbook). That was the point of the earlier discussion.
Two models of PREPARED SPELL CASTING not of spell casting in general and trying to separate out models based on getting extra spells for subclasses or Druidic vs clerical vs arcane foci is, to me, ridiculous. For prepared casters the key difference is whether you “know” all the spells and select the ones you want to “memorize” or you have a bunch of spells written down and you memorize a selected subset for use that day. In the first case you can’t loose access to your spells while in the second you can ( by loosing your spellbook). That was the point of the earlier discussion.
Two models of PREPARED SPELL CASTING not of spell casting in general and trying to separate out models based on getting extra spells for subclasses or Druidic vs clerical vs arcane foci is, to me, ridiculous. For prepared casters the key difference is whether you “know” all the spells and select the ones you want to “memorize” or you have a bunch of spells written down and you memorize a selected subset for use that day. In the first case you can’t loose access to your spells while in the second you can ( by loosing your spellbook). That was the point of the earlier discussion.
Now you're just being reductionist. You can't seriously ignore paladins. They're prepared spellcasters, too, and they do it differently than both of them.
The most recent outrage that has put me firmly into the prepared caster team is when I realized that 1/3rd casters know more spells.
I simply don't understand the purpose of that choice.
IMHO, quality of spells available at the time available.
I would disagree with that as the other casters get spells that are just as impactful IMO.
The limitation of the spell schools is somewhat harsh but a fighter getting Shield and a Rogue getting Find Familar at early levels is really good. Later on the fighter can pick up some really sustainable defensive options or like the rogue pick up Booming Blade and Shadowblade which is hugely impactful to the build.
Overall they get the wizard spell list which is not only one of the best to start with its also the one that keeps getting things added to it more and more.
The simple fact the 1/3rd casters get cantrips alone while the ranger doesn't is a pretty big slap to me honestly...the fact the ranger has to give up a fighting style to get some druid cantrips is not a good exchange IMO.
They are good subclasses. Yes. Very impactful. Different though. And the levels they get spells at and how many of them cast is worth noting as well.
Fair!
I think Rangers absolutely should get cantrips, Mold Earth, Control Flames, Thorn Whip are all obvious choices that would fit them. I am certain there are others, but off the top of my head those come to mind.
I also think all casters should be able to do rituals, it makes 0 sense that they can do the spell quickly, but they can't do it when they have an extra 10 minutes? I am not sure I care as much about them being prepared casters, the ability to change out spells when you level is good enough for me. I also know that all the DMs I have played with, regardless of level would let me swap a spell if it turns out that I never use it.
PS. The fighter can take Find Familiar too, my EK always did.
The most recent outrage that has put me firmly into the prepared caster team is when I realized that 1/3rd casters know more spells.
I simply don't understand the purpose of that choice.
IMHO, quality of spells available at the time available.
I would disagree with that as the other casters get spells that are just as impactful IMO.
The limitation of the spell schools is somewhat harsh but a fighter getting Shield and a Rogue getting Find Familar at early levels is really good. Later on the fighter can pick up some really sustainable defensive options or like the rogue pick up Booming Blade and Shadowblade which is hugely impactful to the build.
Overall they get the wizard spell list which is not only one of the best to start with its also the one that keeps getting things added to it more and more.
The simple fact the 1/3rd casters get cantrips alone while the ranger doesn't is a pretty big slap to me honestly...the fact the ranger has to give up a fighting style to get some druid cantrips is not a good exchange IMO.
They are good subclasses. Yes. Very impactful. Different though. And the levels they get spells at and how many of them cast is worth noting as well.
Fair!
I think Rangers absolutely should get cantrips, Mold Earth, Control Flames, Thorn Whip are all obvious choices that would fit them. I am certain there are others, but off the top of my head those come to mind.
I also think all casters should be able to do rituals, it makes 0 sense that they can do the spell quickly, but they can't do it when they have an extra 10 minutes? I am not sure I care as much about them being prepared casters, the ability to change out spells when you level is good enough for me. I also know that all the DMs I have played with, regardless of level would let me swap a spell if it turns out that I never use it.
PS. The fighter can take Find Familiar too, my EK always did.
Good points.
I feel like melee ranger would get a pretty good boost from thorn whip
The most recent outrage that has put me firmly into the prepared caster team is when I realized that 1/3rd casters know more spells.
I simply don't understand the purpose of that choice.
IMHO, quality of spells available at the time available.
I think it was mostly just to make them more different from Paladin. We do have to remember it took them developing tasha's to look at they didn't give ranger the options of a focus even though more than half (something like 25 of 46 ish) of them require material component (of which only 3 are arrows/quiver/weapon related).
Unfortunately while it seems the current development team is less restrained in their design (for the most part) the fact that the ranger initial design is not the most well developed they unless the 2024 releases have major changes there will still be the same discussions we are having now.
On the note of use of Summons spells to keep the ranger up on the performance curve that seems kind of odd for intention especially with the general dislike the extra table time they take from both original designers and DM perspective.
On a side note I wonder if the beastmaster niche/class fantasy be better fitted as a class of its own and the rest of ranger developed without it?
Rangers can’t use a focus. Just like the EK and AT can’t. So what. We have long known that this is fine as the few spells that require a material component either use a weapon, something found in nature, or they can use a spell component pouch like anyone else (in their hip and easily assessable, unlike holding something like a wand).
Conjure spells are a big part of the druids kit, and thereby the ranger’s. Saying it’s bad they rely on that is strange. Everyone relies on a couple of staples from their build. If someone truly doesn’t want to play a nature magic beast conjuring martial, play a fighter or rogue.
Tell a paladin not to smite. Tell a warlock not to eldritch blast. Silly. Rangers conjure animals. Can it take a long time at the table? Yes. Does it have to? No. A prepared player takes no more time to run conjure animals than a prepared player does to run anything else.
Rangers can’t use a focus. Just like the EK and AT can’t. So what. We have long known that this is fine as the few spells that require a material component either use a weapon, something found in nature, or they can use a spell component pouch like anyone else (in their hip and easily assessable, unlike holding something like a wand).
Conjure spells are a big part of the druids kit, and thereby the ranger’s. Saying it’s bad they rely on that is strange. Everyone relies on a couple of staples from their build. If someone truly doesn’t want to play a nature magic beast conjuring martial, play a fighter or rogue.
Tell a paladin not to smite. Tell a warlock not to eldritch blast. Silly. Rangers conjure animals. Can it take a long time at the table? Yes. Does it have to? No. A prepared player takes no more time to run conjure animals than a prepared player does to run anything else.
I'm sorry, but I just can't agree with any of this.
Rangers *can* use a focus...as of Tasha's. This heavily implies that them not using a focus originally was absolutely an oversight. Note that it's one of the Optional Class Features that is an addition instead of a replacement.
Conjure Animals/Woodland Beings are phenomenal spells. But they are *not* Ranger staple spells. They're *Druid* staples. To compare Conjure spells (of which they get their first at level 9!) To Divine Smite or Eldritch Blast is a false equivalence. The Ranger class fantasy doesn't inherently have conjuring buddies built into it. Not like smiting foes with holy radiance is inherent to the Paladin. Again, conjuring buddies to help you fight is a Druid thing. Which doesn't preclude Rangers from doing the same. But to say it's as inherent to them as Divine Smite is to a Paladin or Eldritch Blast is to a Warlock is unbelievably facetious. Almost as facetious as the idea that Rangers *need* Conjure spells to keep up with the curve at tiers 3+. I've played upwards of 10 Rangers in 5E (over half of them at tiers 3 & 4), not once have I taken a single Conjure spell and not once have I lagged behind in damage. In truth, Conjure Animals doesn't help Rangers keep up with other martials. It helps them completely blow past all other martials and half-casters. Like I said, they're fantastic spells. What they're *not*, however, is required for a Ranger to perform well or for a Ranger's class fantasy. You're looking at Shepherd Druid for that kind of thing.
A prepared player using Conjure Animals will still take longer than a prepared player not using Conjure Animals by simple virtue that, no matter which way you slice it, you have a ton of creatures to give commands to versus not having a ton of creatures to give commands to. Hell, simply saying "all the wolves use the Help action" still takes longer than not having to say that. So let's not start with this.
First, just because something is an optional added class feature doesn’t mean it was an oversight. Mearly selling books. A focus was added because of the Druidic fighting style option in that same book.
Second, yes, they get their conjure animals at level 9. They get hunter’s mark before that. Ranger’s tactics change over the levels. It’s one thing I think bothers people more than they know. You and I agree that rangers don’t lack in the damage department, animals or no. But it is their go to big class spell. That, hunter’s mark, a couple others, and AoE is what sets them apart in the damage realm. It is a spell that is more than damage though.
I have played many characters with conjure animals. Several of you all here tell me it’s a slow spell at the table. I have not seen that as the case at all. Full spellcasters take WAY more time on their turn from what I’ve seen, simply deciding what to do.
The reference to EB and DS are to imply them all being staples of the class design. Same with several ranger spells. Hunter’s mark, conjure animals, and a couple others. Go-to choices, only spells for the ranger versus a class feature like divine smite.
Rangers can’t use a focus. Just like the EK and AT can’t. So what. We have long known that this is fine as the few spells that require a material component either use a weapon, something found in nature, or they can use a spell component pouch like anyone else (in their hip and easily assessable, unlike holding something like a wand).
Conjure spells are a big part of the druids kit, and thereby the ranger’s. Saying it’s bad they rely on that is strange. Everyone relies on a couple of staples from their build. If someone truly doesn’t want to play a nature magic beast conjuring martial, play a fighter or rogue.
Tell a paladin not to smite. Tell a warlock not to eldritch blast. Silly. Rangers conjure animals. Can it take a long time at the table? Yes. Does it have to? No. A prepared player takes no more time to run conjure animals than a prepared player does to run anything else.
I'm sorry, but I just can't agree with any of this.
Rangers *can* use a focus...as of Tasha's. This heavily implies that them not using a focus originally was absolutely an oversight. Note that it's one of the Optional Class Features that is an addition instead of a replacement.
Conjure Animals/Woodland Beings are phenomenal spells. But they are *not* Ranger staple spells. They're *Druid* staples. To compare Conjure spells (of which they get their first at level 9!) To Divine Smite or Eldritch Blast is a false equivalence. The Ranger class fantasy doesn't inherently have conjuring buddies built into it. Not like smiting foes with holy radiance is inherent to the Paladin. Again, conjuring buddies to help you fight is a Druid thing. Which doesn't preclude Rangers from doing the same. But to say it's as inherent to them as Divine Smite is to a Paladin or Eldritch Blast is to a Warlock is unbelievably facetious. Almost as facetious as the idea that Rangers *need* Conjure spells to keep up with the curve at tiers 3+. I've played upwards of 10 Rangers in 5E (over half of them at tiers 3 & 4), not once have I taken a single Conjure spell and not once have I lagged behind in damage. In truth, Conjure Animals doesn't help Rangers keep up with other martials. It helps them completely blow past all other martials and half-casters. Like I said, they're fantastic spells. What they're *not*, however, is required for a Ranger to perform well or for a Ranger's class fantasy. You're looking at Shepherd Druid for that kind of thing.
A prepared player using Conjure Animals will still take longer than a prepared player not using Conjure Animals by simple virtue that, no matter which way you slice it, you have a ton of creatures to give commands to versus not having a ton of creatures to give commands to. Hell, simply saying "all the wolves use the Help action" still takes longer than not having to say that. So let's not start with this.
C'mon Frank. I expect better than this from you.
Which playstyles did you use in those game? How optimized was the groups? I am just curious on how the class was being use. I almost never get to run PC (its DM or no one plays)
On the companion thing I know that there is a bot of legacy lore as an animal companion was class feature for all rangers (one they shared with druids like turn undead was shared with paladin and cleric)
I do agree that the playstyle focused on summoning is much more a part of druid class lore than ranger though.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The most recent outrage that has put me firmly into the prepared caster team is when I realized that 1/3rd casters know more spells.
I simply don't understand the purpose of that choice.
IMHO, quality of spells available at the time available.
I would disagree with that as the other casters get spells that are just as impactful IMO.
The limitation of the spell schools is somewhat harsh but a fighter getting Shield and a Rogue getting Find Familar at early levels is really good. Later on the fighter can pick up some really sustainable defensive options or like the rogue pick up Booming Blade and Shadowblade which is hugely impactful to the build.
Overall they get the wizard spell list which is not only one of the best to start with its also the one that keeps getting things added to it more and more.
The simple fact the 1/3rd casters get cantrips alone while the ranger doesn't is a pretty big slap to me honestly...the fact the ranger has to give up a fighting style to get some druid cantrips is not a good exchange IMO.
Okay, whoa. Hang on there.
I agree that the Ranger spell list is good. But let's not pretend like the Paladin and Artificer lists aren't at least just as good. Now come on now.
You specifically said 1/3 casters.
They are good subclasses. Yes. Very impactful. Different though. And the levels they get spells at and how many of them cast is worth noting as well.
Fair!
Its a sad thing that people forget about scrolls. Just having the spell on a your classes list means you can use scrolls. many of the more situational ranger spells can be saved for a while until absolutly nessicary. since they max out at 5th level that means the desirable scrolls are on the cheaper side in comparison to what full casters work for. My only problem was when they changed the rules to require archana to craft scrolls. especially since the ranger spells are very diffrent from typical casters (with nature/ semi mundane themes). rangers also have one of the best free time features meaning they should be able to craft scrolls while traveling and still maintain watch.
Here is a video on the topic from Pack tactics. I dont always agree with his logic and "applied math" but on this vid on scrolls is rather good. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYPIRZ5pTQM
I respectfully disagree. Every single class with access to spellcasting makes use of it differently.
And warlocks are just special.
So, sorry, but I find it weird that you would say there only two models. Rather deliberately, every single class takes a different approach to spellcasting.
Two models of PREPARED SPELL CASTING not of spell casting in general and trying to separate out models based on getting extra spells for subclasses or Druidic vs clerical vs arcane foci is, to me, ridiculous. For prepared casters the key difference is whether you “know” all the spells and select the ones you want to “memorize” or you have a bunch of spells written down and you memorize a selected subset for use that day. In the first case you can’t loose access to your spells while in the second you can ( by loosing your spellbook). That was the point of the earlier discussion.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
This.
Now you're just being reductionist. You can't seriously ignore paladins. They're prepared spellcasters, too, and they do it differently than both of them.
I think Rangers absolutely should get cantrips, Mold Earth, Control Flames, Thorn Whip are all obvious choices that would fit them. I am certain there are others, but off the top of my head those come to mind.
I also think all casters should be able to do rituals, it makes 0 sense that they can do the spell quickly, but they can't do it when they have an extra 10 minutes? I am not sure I care as much about them being prepared casters, the ability to change out spells when you level is good enough for me. I also know that all the DMs I have played with, regardless of level would let me swap a spell if it turns out that I never use it.
PS. The fighter can take Find Familiar too, my EK always did.
Good points.
I feel like melee ranger would get a pretty good boost from thorn whip
I would give all Rangers the following cantrips:
Acid Splash
Control Flames
Create Bonfire
Druidcraft
Frostbite
Gust
Magic Stone
Mending
Mold Earth
Poison Spray
Primal Savagery
Produce Flame
Shape Water
Thorn Whip
and I would add the following to the expanded list of subclasses
Booming Blade Hunter
Dancing Lights Swarmkeeper
Green-Flame Blade Drakewarden
Infestation Beast Master
Message Gloom Stalker
Resistance Horizon Walker
Guidance Fey Wanderer
Sapping Sting Monster Slayer
Give them the same Cantrip progression as the Druid
I think it was mostly just to make them more different from Paladin. We do have to remember it took them developing tasha's to look at they didn't give ranger the options of a focus even though more than half (something like 25 of 46 ish) of them require material component (of which only 3 are arrows/quiver/weapon related).
Unfortunately while it seems the current development team is less restrained in their design (for the most part) the fact that the ranger initial design is not the most well developed they unless the 2024 releases have major changes there will still be the same discussions we are having now.
On the note of use of Summons spells to keep the ranger up on the performance curve that seems kind of odd for intention especially with the general dislike the extra table time they take from both original designers and DM perspective.
On a side note I wonder if the beastmaster niche/class fantasy be better fitted as a class of its own and the rest of ranger developed without it?
Rangers can’t use a focus. Just like the EK and AT can’t. So what. We have long known that this is fine as the few spells that require a material component either use a weapon, something found in nature, or they can use a spell component pouch like anyone else (in their hip and easily assessable, unlike holding something like a wand).
Conjure spells are a big part of the druids kit, and thereby the ranger’s. Saying it’s bad they rely on that is strange. Everyone relies on a couple of staples from their build. If someone truly doesn’t want to play a nature magic beast conjuring martial, play a fighter or rogue.
Tell a paladin not to smite. Tell a warlock not to eldritch blast. Silly. Rangers conjure animals. Can it take a long time at the table? Yes. Does it have to? No. A prepared player takes no more time to run conjure animals than a prepared player does to run anything else.
I'm sorry, but I just can't agree with any of this.
Rangers *can* use a focus...as of Tasha's. This heavily implies that them not using a focus originally was absolutely an oversight. Note that it's one of the Optional Class Features that is an addition instead of a replacement.
Conjure Animals/Woodland Beings are phenomenal spells. But they are *not* Ranger staple spells. They're *Druid* staples. To compare Conjure spells (of which they get their first at level 9!) To Divine Smite or Eldritch Blast is a false equivalence. The Ranger class fantasy doesn't inherently have conjuring buddies built into it. Not like smiting foes with holy radiance is inherent to the Paladin. Again, conjuring buddies to help you fight is a Druid thing. Which doesn't preclude Rangers from doing the same. But to say it's as inherent to them as Divine Smite is to a Paladin or Eldritch Blast is to a Warlock is unbelievably facetious. Almost as facetious as the idea that Rangers *need* Conjure spells to keep up with the curve at tiers 3+. I've played upwards of 10 Rangers in 5E (over half of them at tiers 3 & 4), not once have I taken a single Conjure spell and not once have I lagged behind in damage. In truth, Conjure Animals doesn't help Rangers keep up with other martials. It helps them completely blow past all other martials and half-casters. Like I said, they're fantastic spells. What they're *not*, however, is required for a Ranger to perform well or for a Ranger's class fantasy. You're looking at Shepherd Druid for that kind of thing.
A prepared player using Conjure Animals will still take longer than a prepared player not using Conjure Animals by simple virtue that, no matter which way you slice it, you have a ton of creatures to give commands to versus not having a ton of creatures to give commands to. Hell, simply saying "all the wolves use the Help action" still takes longer than not having to say that. So let's not start with this.
C'mon Frank. I expect better than this from you.
Thanks!
First, just because something is an optional added class feature doesn’t mean it was an oversight. Mearly selling books. A focus was added because of the Druidic fighting style option in that same book.
Second, yes, they get their conjure animals at level 9. They get hunter’s mark before that. Ranger’s tactics change over the levels. It’s one thing I think bothers people more than they know. You and I agree that rangers don’t lack in the damage department, animals or no. But it is their go to big class spell. That, hunter’s mark, a couple others, and AoE is what sets them apart in the damage realm. It is a spell that is more than damage though.
I have played many characters with conjure animals. Several of you all here tell me it’s a slow spell at the table. I have not seen that as the case at all. Full spellcasters take WAY more time on their turn from what I’ve seen, simply deciding what to do.
The reference to EB and DS are to imply them all being staples of the class design. Same with several ranger spells. Hunter’s mark, conjure animals, and a couple others. Go-to choices, only spells for the ranger versus a class feature like divine smite.
Which playstyles did you use in those game? How optimized was the groups? I am just curious on how the class was being use. I almost never get to run PC (its DM or no one plays)
On the companion thing I know that there is a bot of legacy lore as an animal companion was class feature for all rangers (one they shared with druids like turn undead was shared with paladin and cleric)
I do agree that the playstyle focused on summoning is much more a part of druid class lore than ranger though.