“I'm not gonna sit here and claim Paladin's are bad at combat (lol. That would be ridiculous to say,) but I just think they're a slight bit overrated is all.”
“I'm not gonna sit here and claim Paladin's are bad at combat (lol. That would be ridiculous to say,) but I just think they're a slight bit overrated is all.”
Ok, time for my favorite subclass spells and cantrips!
Beast Master (Primal Companion)
Using any spell slot, meaning it's functionally a level 1 spell, you can bring the companion back to life - it has to have died within the last hour. You spend an action, but it takes a minute to get up, and when it does so, it does so at full hit points.
If your DM is willing to homebrew away that this is illegal, you can target it while it's still alive for the same benefit. If not, just kill your companion and do it, and either way, this heals the companion to full.
Fey Wanderer
Level 2 spell: Misty Step, eventually Misty Step but better
Level 3 spell: Summon Fey but better, with a bonus cast 1/long rest
Gloom Stalker
Level 2 spell: Rope Trick
Level 4 spell: Greater Invisibility
Level 5 spell: Seeming
Horizon Walker
Level 1 spell: Protection from Evil and Good
Level 2 spell: Misty Step
Level 3 spell: Haste
Level 4 spell: Banishment
Special Note: Banishment is a great spell for anyone, but you have to be leaning into Wisdom. Don't dump-stat Wisdom and take this.
Level 5 spell: Teleportation Circle
Level 7 spell: Etherealness but worse, 1/rest (slotless)
Monster Slayer
Level 1 spell: Protection from Evil and Good
Level 4 spell: Banishment
Special Note: Banishment is a great spell for anyone, but you have to be leaning into Wisdom. Don't dump-stat Wisdom and take this.
Swarmkeeper
Level 0 spell: Mage Hand
Level 1 spell: Faerie Fire
Special Note: Don't dump-stat Wisdom and take this.
I love how you pretty much just listed the entirety of the Horizon Walker's spell list. I mean, I agree. H. Walker's have a phenomenal spell list. Special mention to Misty Step and Haste in particular.
I agree with all your picks, but I'd also like to add Charm Person to the Fey Wanderer list because it procs Beguiling Twist.
I also know Magic Circle isn't a great spell (Counterspell would've made more sense) but it's just so thematically perfect for the Monster Slayer that I can't help but adore it.
I'm surprised not to see Fear on the Gloomstalker list and Web on the Swarmkeeper list Quin. Those are my two favorite spells ranger subs get access to. Dimension door, arcane eye, gaseous form, rope trick, misty step and faerie fire get honorable mentions in that order as well.
I love how you pretty much just listed the entirety of the Horizon Walker's spell list. I mean, I agree. H. Walker's have a phenomenal spell list. Special mention to Misty Step and Haste in particular.
I agree with all your picks, but I'd also like to add Charm Person to the Fey Wanderer list because it procs Beguiling Twist.
I also know Magic Circle isn't a great spell (Counterspell would've made more sense) but it's just so thematically perfect for the Monster Slayer that I can't help but adore it.
Rangers are know-casters, and most enemies aren't humanoids. If they were prep-casters, I'd agree with you a lot harder.
I'm surprised not to see Fear on the Gloomstalker list and Web on the Swarmkeeper list Quin. Those are my two favorite spells ranger subs get access to. Dimension door, arcane eye, gaseous form, rope trick, misty step and faerie fire get honorable mentions in that order as well.
As a general rule, Entangle is better - and a level 1 spell, not a level 2.
Gloom Stalkers especially are notorious for preferring Dex to Wis, making me pessimistic about penetrating a Wis save.
Which subclass-specific third attack is the best? Which is your favorite?
Is it the Hunter's Multiattack? Or maybe their Horde Breaker?
Is it the Beast Master's Bestial Fury?
Is it the Gloomstalker's Dread Ambusher? Don't forget they also get Stalker's Flurry!
Is it the Horizon Walker's Distant Strikes? Or is it just Haste?
Is it the Monster Slayer's Slayer's Counter?
Is it the Fey Wanderer's Fey Reinforcements?
Is it the Drakewarden's Drake Companion?
I have absolutely no idea how the Drakewarden works (I've never read the UA, and on top of that, the "real" one is about to drop), but if I'm picking from that menu, it's Haste for certain.
I just looked up the UA out of curiosity, and I'll bet you a dollar right now it won't be in Fizban's verbatim, since it has no spells on it. I'm quite certain gone are the days of Ranger subclasses with no additional spells. There are several other things I strongly suspect will change - for example, the L11 breath attack requiring an action no matter what is bound to change.
I'm not sure what you mean with the Known Casters vs Prepared Casters comment. I'm talking about the Horizon Walker, Fey Wanderer, and Monster Slayer expanded spell lists, which don't get in the way of the Ranger's known spells.
I agree that the Drakewarden isn't making it to print as-is. I know the drake's short duration was very unpopular in playtest, the way it interacts with PB is slightly off relative to all other pet classes, the lack of expanded spell list is noticeable, and the drake jumping from small to large without a medium step stands out as odd.
The lack of spell list might be WotC attempting to make a distinction between more martial Rangers (Hunter, Beast Master, Drakewarden) and the more casty Rangers (Xanathar's and Tasha's.) I don't think I personally would like that direction -I believe Drakewarden should have an expanded spell list- but I can definitely see that as WotC's logic.
The drake's duration and sudden size shift could have been balancing factors to make up for the drake's overall power (no medium means small creatures can't ride it sooner than 15th) but they feel really awkward, and I feel they should be streamlined a bit better.
I'm not sure what you mean with the Known Casters vs Prepared Casters comment. I'm talking about the Horizon Walker, Fey Wanderer, and Monster Slayer expanded spell lists, which don't get in the way of the Ranger's known spells.
Oh, my bad. Then yeah, Charm Person can be nice when it comes up... but it's not a great use of your spell slots if your real goal is lay down frightened. I'm not a fan of Charm Person in general, though.
So, I've designed a Drakewarden for a oneshot I'll be playing in next week. I see this as my chance to try out the UA version before the official one comes around and changes things.
This particular character is an archeologist who found a dragon egg while studying a dig site of some ancient ruins. The dragon hatched and imprinted on her.
To reflect this mechanically, I made this particular Drakewarden focusing on Intelligence rather than Wisdom. It feels so weird to have a Ranger with only +2 in Survival, but with a +11 in History and Religion (Deft Explorer + Skill Expert.) That being said, this may be one of my favorite Rangers I've ever built. I went for a melee build rather than ranged (mostly for a change of pace) but chose Sword & Board with a rapier rather than going STRanger because attempting to add Strength to the pool of Dexterity (for AC,) Constitution (HP and concentration saves), Intelligence (skills), and Wisdom (because I'm not neglecting it; just prioritizing Int) was too much.
Although I do want to try a STRanger soon enough.
Another thing I decided to do with this build was to forego Hunter's Mark altogether. I wanted to take Ensnaring Strike, but with my low Wisdom (and saves, by extension,) I figured I'd be better off without any save spells. So I went with Absorb Elements, Zephyr Strike, and Goodberry as my 1st-level spells.
I did end up going with Favored Foe instead of Favored Enemy this time because, honestly, I never take Favored Foe. Like, at all. I wanted to give it a fair shake.
My problem with spells like magic weapon is that in most case they are too little, too late for a half caster like a ranger. By 5L in most of the campaigns I’ve played in at the very least your main weapon is magical. I’ve also played in campaigns where magic items were essentially nonexistent so yes it has its place occasionally. It would work better, as would ranger spells in general if they were exchangeable. I would like to know why many of you rate good berry so highly - with just 1 point of healing and the rest nourishment that should be coming from the ranger’s foraging. At level 2 I normally take hunter’s mark and cure wounds but that may be because I’m often splitting the party healing with a bard not a cleric.
Goodberry is a non-concentration spell that lasts 24 hours. For one 1st-level spell slot, you essentially get 10 HP to restore at a moment's notice.
Which would be fine on it's own. Except Goodberry can stack. You could theoretically blow four spell slots for 40 berries. And since they last 24 hours, you could theoretically do it before taking a long rest. When you get your spell slots back, the berries will still be there. You can then distribute them to your allies so they can heal themselves. It's probably not as useful as Cure Wounds in the heat of battle, but it's one of the best non-combat healing spells in the game.
One of the reasons Paladins do combat magic better is that they have access to Divine Smite
Divine Smile is pretty strong, but I think it's to the class' detriment. It's almost too overbearing, to the point a large number of the paladins I see in actually play essentially aren't spellcasters anymore, because most if not all of their magical resources just turn into Smite.
Paladins are strong, but I think the way rangers interact with magic is just a lot more well designed.
One of the reasons Paladins do combat magic better is that they have access to Divine Smite
Divine Smile is pretty strong, but I think it's to the class' detriment. It's almost too overbearing, to the point a large number of the paladins I see in actually play essentially aren't spellcasters anymore, because most if not all of their magical resources just turn into Smite.
Paladins are strong, but I think the way rangers interact with magic is just a lot more well designed.
What do you mean? It's not designed at all. Rangers interact with magic the same way a level 1 sorcerer with no subclass does - they have no special interactions with it at all except for Primeval Awareness in the PHB, and in Tasha's, they potentially gain some others, like Favored Foe blocking concentration on a spell.
I'm not saying Rangers should have Divine Smite or any other way for their slots to directly interact with damage, including self-healing like a Moon Druid or damage reduction like a Bladesinger. I am saying they should have more ways to spend their slots. They start off worse than a Paladin at spellcasting due to the double-nerf of being a know-caster (so swapping spells in response to new information is impossible - you have to level to do any swapping) and of their total spells on hand being fewer (for a CHA 16 Paladin, exactly 2 fewer). Giving them a non-spell way to spend slots to supplement their spells known is more justified on them than on a Paladin, not less.
Since the current context is combat magic - and certainly there's excellent cause to give Rangers non-combat magic mechanics - here's an example mechanic you could give them:
Poisoning Strike:
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack. you can expend 1 spell slot to attempt a poisoning strike. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or be poisoned for a number of rounds equal to the level of the spell slot. If a creature fails the saving throw by 5 or more, it also falls unconscious while poisoned in this way; it wakes up early if it takes any damage or if another creature takes an action to shake it awake.
I'm not saying this has to be in addition to their current ability set or anything - you could swap something out for it, possibly modifying it as you do so. It's just an example way to interact with magic that's actually compatible with making multiple attacks per turn, like Paladins and Moon Druids get, and Bladesingers get twice over (both attack+cantrip and spending slots for reduction).
One of the reasons Paladins do combat magic better is that they have access to Divine Smite
Divine Smile is pretty strong, but I think it's to the class' detriment. It's almost too overbearing, to the point a large number of the paladins I see in actually play essentially aren't spellcasters anymore, because most if not all of their magical resources just turn into Smite.
Paladins are strong, but I think the way rangers interact with magic is just a lot more well designed.
What do you mean? It's not designed at all. Rangers interact with magic the same way a level 1 sorcerer with no subclass does - they have no special interactions with it at all except for Primeval Awareness in the PHB, and in Tasha's, they potentially gain some others, like Favored Foe blocking concentration on a spell.
I'm not saying Rangers should have Divine Smite or any other way for their slots to directly interact with damage, including self-healing like a Moon Druid or damage reduction like a Bladesinger. I am saying they should have more ways to spend their slots. They start off worse than a Paladin at spellcasting due to the double-nerf of being a know-caster (so swapping spells in response to new information is impossible - you have to level to do any swapping) and of their total spells on hand being fewer (for a CHA 16 Paladin, exactly 2 fewer). Giving them a non-spell way to spend slots to supplement their spells known is more justified on them than on a Paladin, not less.
Since the current context is combat magic - and certainly there's excellent cause to give Rangers non-combat magic mechanics - here's an example mechanic you could give them:
Poisoning Strike:
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack. you can expend 1 spell slot to attempt a poisoning strike. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or be poisoned for a number of rounds equal to the level of the spell slot. If a creature fails the saving throw by 5 or more, it also falls unconscious while poisoned in this way; it wakes up early if it takes any damage or if another creature takes an action to shake it awake.
I'm not saying this has to be in addition to their current ability set or anything - you could swap something out for it, possibly modifying it as you do so. It's just an example way to interact with magic that's actually compatible with making multiple attacks per turn, like Paladins and Moon Druids get, and Bladesingers get twice over (both attack+cantrip and spending slots for reduction).
Rangers cast their spells to great effect. Less so paladins. I believe that was their meaning. Paladins suffer from the same throng artificers do. Choke point options and function. Paladins give a lot to cast most of their spells, usually an entire action, and for some of the most effective, use of a free hand. Smite just happens, so it is superior most of the time. Also, paladins made be able to switch out spells and such, but most paladin spells all do one of three things just a little different. Ranger spells are all very different with vast effects in the game, in combat and otherwise.
One of the reasons Paladins do combat magic better is that they have access to Divine Smite
Divine Smile is pretty strong, but I think it's to the class' detriment. It's almost too overbearing, to the point a large number of the paladins I see in actually play essentially aren't spellcasters anymore, because most if not all of their magical resources just turn into Smite.
Paladins are strong, but I think the way rangers interact with magic is just a lot more well designed.
What do you mean? It's not designed at all. Rangers interact with magic the same way a level 1 sorcerer with no subclass does - they have no special interactions with it at all except for Primeval Awareness in the PHB, and in Tasha's, they potentially gain some others, like Favored Foe blocking concentration on a spell.
I'm not saying Rangers should have Divine Smite or any other way for their slots to directly interact with damage, including self-healing like a Moon Druid or damage reduction like a Bladesinger. I am saying they should have more ways to spend their slots. They start off worse than a Paladin at spellcasting due to the double-nerf of being a know-caster (so swapping spells in response to new information is impossible - you have to level to do any swapping) and of their total spells on hand being fewer (for a CHA 16 Paladin, exactly 2 fewer). Giving them a non-spell way to spend slots to supplement their spells known is more justified on them than on a Paladin, not less.
Since the current context is combat magic - and certainly there's excellent cause to give Rangers non-combat magic mechanics - here's an example mechanic you could give them:
Poisoning Strike:
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack. you can expend 1 spell slot to attempt a poisoning strike. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or be poisoned for a number of rounds equal to the level of the spell slot. If a creature fails the saving throw by 5 or more, it also falls unconscious while poisoned in this way; it wakes up early if it takes any damage or if another creature takes an action to shake it awake.
I'm not saying this has to be in addition to their current ability set or anything - you could swap something out for it, possibly modifying it as you do so. It's just an example way to interact with magic that's actually compatible with making multiple attacks per turn, like Paladins and Moon Druids get, and Bladesingers get twice over (both attack+cantrip and spending slots for reduction).
Rangers cast their spells to great effect. Less so paladins. I believe that was their meaning. Paladins suffer from the same throng artificers do. Choke point options and function. Paladins give a lot to cast most of their spells, usually an entire action, and for some of the most effective, use of a free hand. Smite just happens, so it is superior most of the time. Also, paladins made be able to switch out spells and such, but most paladin spells all do one of three things just a little different. Ranger spells are all very different with vast effects in the game, in combat and otherwise.
I would disagree as paladins have a lot of bonus action based smite spells that stack with smite in general. I have seen Banishing Smite in particular be VERY effective in a big fight.
Having just come out of playing a Paladin and a Ranger concurrently (they're my two favorite classes in 5E,) I'm actually of the opinion that Rangers get more out of their spellcasting than paladins.
Paladins are always having to decide if they should save a spell slot for Smiting or actually make use of their spellcasting ability. Since both use the same resource, a Paladin is going to either burn through their spell slots quickly --at which point they become just a worse Fighter offensively-- or conserve their spell slots zealously. But when conserving spell slots, they are --in effect-- just a worse Fighter offensively.
Basically, the Paladin is always having to decide between damage and utility. This is intentional and made as a balancing factor for an otherwise overpowered class. But it still doesn't change the fact that Paladin features cannibalize each other. Every Smite is one less Protection from Evil & Good. Every Revivify is one less Smite. Personally, I don't enjoy it.
A Ranger, on the other hand, doesn't have this problem. Sure, they may know fewer spells, but since the spellcasting isn't competing with anything else, they're free to use it as they see fit. Whether it's Goodberry, Pass without Trace, Hunter's Mark, or Entangle. Also, most Ranger spells tend to last whole encounters, or have control effects that remain even after the spell is done (like Ensnaring Strike.) So it really feels like they're making full use of their spellcasting.
I know right? And it's wonderful. As a ranger I get to cast the spells I've learned with impunity and not have to worry about how they compete with my innate class features that also run on spell slots. I have a variety of unique spells that do cool things and I can pick whatever tool I want for the situation.
Yeah sure, if you want to make the point that WOTC really misjudged the know-vs-preparation mechanics when they designed 5e I won't argue that, but that doesn't change my own experiences that Rangers spend a lot more time thinking about and utilizing their magic than Paladins specifically because they don't have some overbearing class feature that demands they dump all their spell slots into.
Genuinely think features like Smite, or an Alchemist's elixirs or even an Artillerist's cannon just aren't great because they end up stripping a lot of the spellcasting out of classes that ostensibly should be pretty magical.
Again, not an argument that Paladins aren't strong. It's pretty self-evident that they are, but strong doesn't mean well-designed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
“I'm not gonna sit here and claim Paladin's are bad at combat (lol. That would be ridiculous to say,) but I just think they're a slight bit overrated is all.”
How about one dimensional and predictable?
I say that.
Ok, time for my favorite subclass spells and cantrips!
Druid Cantrips from Druidic Warrior:
I love how you pretty much just listed the entirety of the Horizon Walker's spell list. I mean, I agree. H. Walker's have a phenomenal spell list. Special mention to Misty Step and Haste in particular.
I agree with all your picks, but I'd also like to add Charm Person to the Fey Wanderer list because it procs Beguiling Twist.
I also know Magic Circle isn't a great spell (Counterspell would've made more sense) but it's just so thematically perfect for the Monster Slayer that I can't help but adore it.
I'm surprised not to see Fear on the Gloomstalker list and Web on the Swarmkeeper list Quin. Those are my two favorite spells ranger subs get access to. Dimension door, arcane eye, gaseous form, rope trick, misty step and faerie fire get honorable mentions in that order as well.
Which subclass-specific third attack is the best? Which is your favorite?
Is it the Hunter's Multiattack? Or maybe their Horde Breaker?
Is it the Beast Master's Bestial Fury?
Is it the Gloomstalker's Dread Ambusher? Don't forget they also get Stalker's Flurry!
Is it the Horizon Walker's Distant Strikes? Or is it just Haste?
Is it the Monster Slayer's Slayer's Counter?
Is it the Fey Wanderer's Fey Reinforcements?
Is it the Drakewarden's Drake Companion?
Rangers are know-casters, and most enemies aren't humanoids. If they were prep-casters, I'd agree with you a lot harder.
I have absolutely no idea how the Drakewarden works (I've never read the UA, and on top of that, the "real" one is about to drop), but if I'm picking from that menu, it's Haste for certain.
I just looked up the UA out of curiosity, and I'll bet you a dollar right now it won't be in Fizban's verbatim, since it has no spells on it. I'm quite certain gone are the days of Ranger subclasses with no additional spells. There are several other things I strongly suspect will change - for example, the L11 breath attack requiring an action no matter what is bound to change.
I'm not sure what you mean with the Known Casters vs Prepared Casters comment. I'm talking about the Horizon Walker, Fey Wanderer, and Monster Slayer expanded spell lists, which don't get in the way of the Ranger's known spells.
I agree that the Drakewarden isn't making it to print as-is. I know the drake's short duration was very unpopular in playtest, the way it interacts with PB is slightly off relative to all other pet classes, the lack of expanded spell list is noticeable, and the drake jumping from small to large without a medium step stands out as odd.
The lack of spell list might be WotC attempting to make a distinction between more martial Rangers (Hunter, Beast Master, Drakewarden) and the more casty Rangers (Xanathar's and Tasha's.) I don't think I personally would like that direction -I believe Drakewarden should have an expanded spell list- but I can definitely see that as WotC's logic.
The drake's duration and sudden size shift could have been balancing factors to make up for the drake's overall power (no medium means small creatures can't ride it sooner than 15th) but they feel really awkward, and I feel they should be streamlined a bit better.
Oh, my bad. Then yeah, Charm Person can be nice when it comes up... but it's not a great use of your spell slots if your real goal is lay down frightened. I'm not a fan of Charm Person in general, though.
So, I've designed a Drakewarden for a oneshot I'll be playing in next week. I see this as my chance to try out the UA version before the official one comes around and changes things.
This particular character is an archeologist who found a dragon egg while studying a dig site of some ancient ruins. The dragon hatched and imprinted on her.
To reflect this mechanically, I made this particular Drakewarden focusing on Intelligence rather than Wisdom. It feels so weird to have a Ranger with only +2 in Survival, but with a +11 in History and Religion (Deft Explorer + Skill Expert.) That being said, this may be one of my favorite Rangers I've ever built. I went for a melee build rather than ranged (mostly for a change of pace) but chose Sword & Board with a rapier rather than going STRanger because attempting to add Strength to the pool of Dexterity (for AC,) Constitution (HP and concentration saves), Intelligence (skills), and Wisdom (because I'm not neglecting it; just prioritizing Int) was too much.
Although I do want to try a STRanger soon enough.
Another thing I decided to do with this build was to forego Hunter's Mark altogether. I wanted to take Ensnaring Strike, but with my low Wisdom (and saves, by extension,) I figured I'd be better off without any save spells. So I went with Absorb Elements, Zephyr Strike, and Goodberry as my 1st-level spells.
I did end up going with Favored Foe instead of Favored Enemy this time because, honestly, I never take Favored Foe. Like, at all. I wanted to give it a fair shake.
My problem with spells like magic weapon is that in most case they are too little, too late for a half caster like a ranger. By 5L in most of the campaigns I’ve played in at the very least your main weapon is magical. I’ve also played in campaigns where magic items were essentially nonexistent so yes it has its place occasionally. It would work better, as would ranger spells in general if they were exchangeable.
I would like to know why many of you rate good berry so highly - with just 1 point of healing and the rest nourishment that should be coming from the ranger’s foraging. At level 2 I normally take hunter’s mark and cure wounds but that may be because I’m often splitting the party healing with a bard not a cleric.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Goodberry is a non-concentration spell that lasts 24 hours. For one 1st-level spell slot, you essentially get 10 HP to restore at a moment's notice.
Which would be fine on it's own. Except Goodberry can stack. You could theoretically blow four spell slots for 40 berries. And since they last 24 hours, you could theoretically do it before taking a long rest. When you get your spell slots back, the berries will still be there. You can then distribute them to your allies so they can heal themselves. It's probably not as useful as Cure Wounds in the heat of battle, but it's one of the best non-combat healing spells in the game.
I ended up carrying goodberry through 11 levels of character. Its use in survival, and as a HP recovery security blanket make it excellent.
Divine Smile is pretty strong, but I think it's to the class' detriment. It's almost too overbearing, to the point a large number of the paladins I see in actually play essentially aren't spellcasters anymore, because most if not all of their magical resources just turn into Smite.
Paladins are strong, but I think the way rangers interact with magic is just a lot more well designed.
Yeah if you have extra spell slots you might as well use them to make goodberries for literal "pick me ups"
What do you mean? It's not designed at all. Rangers interact with magic the same way a level 1 sorcerer with no subclass does - they have no special interactions with it at all except for Primeval Awareness in the PHB, and in Tasha's, they potentially gain some others, like Favored Foe blocking concentration on a spell.
I'm not saying Rangers should have Divine Smite or any other way for their slots to directly interact with damage, including self-healing like a Moon Druid or damage reduction like a Bladesinger. I am saying they should have more ways to spend their slots. They start off worse than a Paladin at spellcasting due to the double-nerf of being a know-caster (so swapping spells in response to new information is impossible - you have to level to do any swapping) and of their total spells on hand being fewer (for a CHA 16 Paladin, exactly 2 fewer). Giving them a non-spell way to spend slots to supplement their spells known is more justified on them than on a Paladin, not less.
Since the current context is combat magic - and certainly there's excellent cause to give Rangers non-combat magic mechanics - here's an example mechanic you could give them:
Poisoning Strike:
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack. you can expend 1 spell slot to attempt a poisoning strike. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or be poisoned for a number of rounds equal to the level of the spell slot. If a creature fails the saving throw by 5 or more, it also falls unconscious while poisoned in this way; it wakes up early if it takes any damage or if another creature takes an action to shake it awake.
I'm not saying this has to be in addition to their current ability set or anything - you could swap something out for it, possibly modifying it as you do so. It's just an example way to interact with magic that's actually compatible with making multiple attacks per turn, like Paladins and Moon Druids get, and Bladesingers get twice over (both attack+cantrip and spending slots for reduction).
Rangers cast their spells to great effect. Less so paladins. I believe that was their meaning. Paladins suffer from the same throng artificers do. Choke point options and function. Paladins give a lot to cast most of their spells, usually an entire action, and for some of the most effective, use of a free hand. Smite just happens, so it is superior most of the time. Also, paladins made be able to switch out spells and such, but most paladin spells all do one of three things just a little different. Ranger spells are all very different with vast effects in the game, in combat and otherwise.
I would disagree as paladins have a lot of bonus action based smite spells that stack with smite in general. I have seen Banishing Smite in particular be VERY effective in a big fight.
Having just come out of playing a Paladin and a Ranger concurrently (they're my two favorite classes in 5E,) I'm actually of the opinion that Rangers get more out of their spellcasting than paladins.
Paladins are always having to decide if they should save a spell slot for Smiting or actually make use of their spellcasting ability. Since both use the same resource, a Paladin is going to either burn through their spell slots quickly --at which point they become just a worse Fighter offensively-- or conserve their spell slots zealously. But when conserving spell slots, they are --in effect-- just a worse Fighter offensively.
Basically, the Paladin is always having to decide between damage and utility. This is intentional and made as a balancing factor for an otherwise overpowered class. But it still doesn't change the fact that Paladin features cannibalize each other. Every Smite is one less Protection from Evil & Good. Every Revivify is one less Smite. Personally, I don't enjoy it.
A Ranger, on the other hand, doesn't have this problem. Sure, they may know fewer spells, but since the spellcasting isn't competing with anything else, they're free to use it as they see fit. Whether it's Goodberry, Pass without Trace, Hunter's Mark, or Entangle. Also, most Ranger spells tend to last whole encounters, or have control effects that remain even after the spell is done (like Ensnaring Strike.) So it really feels like they're making full use of their spellcasting.
I know right? And it's wonderful. As a ranger I get to cast the spells I've learned with impunity and not have to worry about how they compete with my innate class features that also run on spell slots. I have a variety of unique spells that do cool things and I can pick whatever tool I want for the situation.
Yeah sure, if you want to make the point that WOTC really misjudged the know-vs-preparation mechanics when they designed 5e I won't argue that, but that doesn't change my own experiences that Rangers spend a lot more time thinking about and utilizing their magic than Paladins specifically because they don't have some overbearing class feature that demands they dump all their spell slots into.
Genuinely think features like Smite, or an Alchemist's elixirs or even an Artillerist's cannon just aren't great because they end up stripping a lot of the spellcasting out of classes that ostensibly should be pretty magical.
Again, not an argument that Paladins aren't strong. It's pretty self-evident that they are, but strong doesn't mean well-designed.