there are plenty of times swapping a shield as an action is worth it. as long as enemy actions are used up your party can still win through attrition. Also being able to start a dungeon and swap between combats means you can Plan for hp as a resource better.
Hunter PAM with Dueling, Zephyr Strike and Colossus Slayer will pull out a consistent amount of damage because you’ll force enemies to trigger PAM OA every time. Colossus Slayer d8 damage can be activated off turn, in the same fashion of Sneak Attack.
GWM is superior, but different from Barbarians and Battlemasters, Rangers don’t have a reliable way to offset the -5 to hit, that’s why I think Dueling paired with some spells is better. You can even leverage Hunters Mark against BBEGs that you know will endure at least 5+ rounds of combat.
Hunter PAM with Dueling, Zephyr Strike and Colossus Slayer will pull out a consistent amount of damage because you’ll force enemies to trigger PAM OA every time. Colossus Slayer d8 damage can be activated off turn, in the same fashion of Sneak Attack.
GWM is superior, but different from Barbarians and Battlemasters, Rangers don’t have a reliable way to offset the -5 to hit, that’s why I think Dueling paired with some spells is better. You can even leverage Hunters Mark against BBEGs that you know will endure at least 5+ rounds of combat.
Yeah agreed that first build will keep up well. I like that as an option for shield ranger
Realistically your probably not casting spells in the Middle of combat anyway. After L5 your probably better off with the shield AC than the bonus action TWF attack except in emergencies where you need that third attack desperately.
I would disagree with this, I am casting all the time during combat.
That said I don't see what you mean. Niether the dual wielding feat, nor the two weapon fighting style have anything to do with stowing a shield. The TWF does nothing to solve the problems with having hands and dual wielding only affects weapons, not components or shields.
the point is there are lots of ways to work with a ranger build. with lots of stat options, spell options, equipment options, feat options or tactical options. when you set one Piece in place you start to fill out the others. You make trade offs for the roles you want to play and the individual scenario's you experience. That sounds like good play to me.
ECMO3 - I should have said melee not combat. As for the don/doff if you take a look at actual mideveal evidence knights ( and others) often used a shield strap over the shoulder that allowed it to be carried on the back when not needed and then swung into position with pretty much a shrug. Further, a shield in trained hands is a weapon not just a defensive tool - bashes, pushes, spikes, etc all make the shield as much a weapon as almost any other thing you can hold in your offhand so useing the TWF don/doff for the shield is a reasonable house rule if nothing else.g
A further thought - the shield master feat says this: “You use shields not just for protection but also for offense.” If you have the feat your shield should be counted as a weapon allowing the two weapon fighting to affect it.
If that were the intent, the feat would say so. But it doesn't. The offensive use is using their bonus action to make a special attack to knock an enemy prone.
I wasn't expecting Rangers to really get anything in Spelljammer, but they did apparently get one new spell: Air Bubble. What, if anything, does this do for the class moving forward?
And to keep discussion a bit more interesting, let's springboard off of that and talk about how well (or poorly) the new player options in Spelljammer synergize with the Ranger class. Personally -and I know this is basic as all get-out- I'm excited to try an Astral Elf Ranger with the Astral Drifter background.
specifically I am kind of up set how they made miniature giant Space Hamster incompatible with so many ranger spells and features. a player that takes favored enemy beasts has less Knowledge justification about them than one that takes monstrosities. "does that seem right to you? - Orly from firefly. Yes I know it makes me seem like a crazy ranter but there's always a ring of deeper truth.
All the other creatures also are kind of lackluster for ranger. Space eel is the best new creature for conjure animals and should do a decent job for its CR but has its weaknesses.
Now as for air bubble it allows underwater function at lower levels for seafaring campaigns but realistically they do the job worse than a druid or other utility class. still having it as a scroll is nice but you also could have a waterbreathing scroll for more per person value. breathing options are also really costly on beastmasters (both phb and tasha's {tasha's technically looses the old pet when summoning a new one} and {forces tactics change grapple instead of damage}).
What do the new rules (particularly those that relate to spells) spell for the Ranger class?
Rangers with the Tasha's upgrades are good in space, because having a swim speed now buffs you in zero g and of course having a climb speed lets you clamber about your ship more easily.
Unfortunately, while Rangers are fully qualified starting at level 2 to be a ship's spelljammer, the new rules don't really have any allowance for spelljammers to have differing levels of competence. Since all spelljammers are equal, Rangers aren't particularly good (or bad) at spelljamming. For example, ships going at interplanetary speed always travel at the same rate regardless of spelljammer, and the DM decides encounter distances - a spelljammer can't be so competent they influence that decision.
Rangers are traditionally good at Survival checks, which will be helpful for the new rules for Astral Fishing, but alas, we didn't get a rules supplement letting Rangers choose Wildspace/Astral Space as a favored biome.
Oh, and I suppose this is more of a Druid thing, but from a skim of the bestiary, I believe the best new target for Awaken is the space guppy if you're in a Spelljammer setting, because while the rules aren't clear on how much air a creature needs, a school of guppies of whatever size your DM deems sufficient that can be trusted to stay on board your ship will give you all the air you'll ever need.
Oh, I was actually referring to the One DnD news we got today. Particularly how Druids and Rangers will apparently draw from the same spell pool (modified individually by spells we're not yet privy to.)
I am concerned about unique spells and how they will be handled. Will a druid get to prepare hunters mark? that could be a big win for moon druid and a minor slight to rangers. what about swift quiver, steelwind strike ect. There may be a good chance that the 3 spell lists are limited to only low levels but we kind of have to wait and see. right now it only listed cantrips and first level.
Background changes means interesting implications for the outlander background. Hopefully no more wrongful assumptions that outlander features is better than a ranger.
The critical hits thing seems to really devalue advantage design. also it could lead to dms discouraging skill based approachs to encounters feel like inspiration fishing.
More advantage makes phb ranger (and others as well) features less outstanding. Even the people who like Favored enemy and phb beastmaster will be slightly more discouraged because thier advantage skills can be bypassed by the musician feat.
there are plenty of times swapping a shield as an action is worth it. as long as enemy actions are used up your party can still win through attrition. Also being able to start a dungeon and swap between combats means you can Plan for hp as a resource better.
Hunter PAM with Dueling, Zephyr Strike and Colossus Slayer will pull out a consistent amount of damage because you’ll force enemies to trigger PAM OA every time. Colossus Slayer d8 damage can be activated off turn, in the same fashion of Sneak Attack.
GWM is superior, but different from Barbarians and Battlemasters, Rangers don’t have a reliable way to offset the -5 to hit, that’s why I think Dueling paired with some spells is better. You can even leverage Hunters Mark against BBEGs that you know will endure at least 5+ rounds of combat.
Yeah agreed that first build will keep up well. I like that as an option for shield ranger
I would disagree with this, I am casting all the time during combat.
That said I don't see what you mean. Niether the dual wielding feat, nor the two weapon fighting style have anything to do with stowing a shield. The TWF does nothing to solve the problems with having hands and dual wielding only affects weapons, not components or shields.
the point is there are lots of ways to work with a ranger build. with lots of stat options, spell options, equipment options, feat options or tactical options. when you set one Piece in place you start to fill out the others. You make trade offs for the roles you want to play and the individual scenario's you experience. That sounds like good play to me.
ECMO3 - I should have said melee not combat. As for the don/doff if you take a look at actual mideveal evidence knights ( and others) often used a shield strap over the shoulder that allowed it to be carried on the back when not needed and then swung into position with pretty much a shrug. Further, a shield in trained hands is a weapon not just a defensive tool - bashes, pushes, spikes, etc all make the shield as much a weapon as almost any other thing you can hold in your offhand so useing the TWF don/doff for the shield is a reasonable house rule if nothing else.g
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
A further thought - the shield master feat says this: “You use shields not just for protection but also for offense.” If you have the feat your shield should be counted as a weapon allowing the two weapon fighting to affect it.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
If that were the intent, the feat would say so. But it doesn't. The offensive use is using their bonus action to make a special attack to knock an enemy prone.
I wasn't expecting Rangers to really get anything in Spelljammer, but they did apparently get one new spell: Air Bubble. What, if anything, does this do for the class moving forward?
And to keep discussion a bit more interesting, let's springboard off of that and talk about how well (or poorly) the new player options in Spelljammer synergize with the Ranger class. Personally -and I know this is basic as all get-out- I'm excited to try an Astral Elf Ranger with the Astral Drifter background.
specifically I am kind of up set how they made miniature giant Space Hamster incompatible with so many ranger spells and features. a player that takes favored enemy beasts has less Knowledge justification about them than one that takes monstrosities. "does that seem right to you? - Orly from firefly. Yes I know it makes me seem like a crazy ranter but there's always a ring of deeper truth.
All the other creatures also are kind of lackluster for ranger. Space eel is the best new creature for conjure animals and should do a decent job for its CR but has its weaknesses.
Now as for air bubble it allows underwater function at lower levels for seafaring campaigns but realistically they do the job worse than a druid or other utility class. still having it as a scroll is nice but you also could have a waterbreathing scroll for more per person value. breathing options are also really costly on beastmasters (both phb and tasha's {tasha's technically looses the old pet when summoning a new one} and {forces tactics change grapple instead of damage}).
What do the new rules (particularly those that relate to spells) spell for the Ranger class?
Rangers with the Tasha's upgrades are good in space, because having a swim speed now buffs you in zero g and of course having a climb speed lets you clamber about your ship more easily.
Unfortunately, while Rangers are fully qualified starting at level 2 to be a ship's spelljammer, the new rules don't really have any allowance for spelljammers to have differing levels of competence. Since all spelljammers are equal, Rangers aren't particularly good (or bad) at spelljamming. For example, ships going at interplanetary speed always travel at the same rate regardless of spelljammer, and the DM decides encounter distances - a spelljammer can't be so competent they influence that decision.
Rangers are traditionally good at Survival checks, which will be helpful for the new rules for Astral Fishing, but alas, we didn't get a rules supplement letting Rangers choose Wildspace/Astral Space as a favored biome.
Oh, and I suppose this is more of a Druid thing, but from a skim of the bestiary, I believe the best new target for Awaken is the space guppy if you're in a Spelljammer setting, because while the rules aren't clear on how much air a creature needs, a school of guppies of whatever size your DM deems sufficient that can be trusted to stay on board your ship will give you all the air you'll ever need.
Oh, I was actually referring to the One DnD news we got today. Particularly how Druids and Rangers will apparently draw from the same spell pool (modified individually by spells we're not yet privy to.)
But I appreciate the Spelljammer answer as well.
I am concerned about unique spells and how they will be handled. Will a druid get to prepare hunters mark? that could be a big win for moon druid and a minor slight to rangers. what about swift quiver, steelwind strike ect. There may be a good chance that the 3 spell lists are limited to only low levels but we kind of have to wait and see. right now it only listed cantrips and first level.
Background changes means interesting implications for the outlander background. Hopefully no more wrongful assumptions that outlander features is better than a ranger.
The critical hits thing seems to really devalue advantage design. also it could lead to dms discouraging skill based approachs to encounters feel like inspiration fishing.
More advantage makes phb ranger (and others as well) features less outstanding. Even the people who like Favored enemy and phb beastmaster will be slightly more discouraged because thier advantage skills can be bypassed by the musician feat.
Yeah, it's brutally awful removing the ability of your NPC companions to crit.
simple solution, count companions as player characters