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 a 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.
Yes! 100%
AND many of the ranger spells are concentration (which I see as a good thing) so last over great amounts of time, perhaps many combats.
AND many ranger spells benefit greatly from being upcast with a higher spell slot.
AND unlike the plethora of paladin spells that do single target damage in slightly different ways, ranger spells have tactical benefits that are only limited by the player's/character's imagination.
Folks complain about ranger bonus action clog, but paladin standard action clog WAY overshadows it. Look how many paladin class features, subclass features, and spells have "...as an action..." as part of them. Decisions...decisions...decisions...
It's a particularly weak argument that Rangers are better designed because they have fewer ways to use their spell slots - any Paladin can just ignore Divine Smite. It's an optional ability. A Paladin refusing to use Divine Smite is just a Ranger with more spells per day that can be swapped around, in terms of amount of magic. Granted, the two of you, Squiggit and Envoy, might suffer from choice paralysis between spells and smiting, but that's on you. Divine Smite is functionally just another spell in your toolkit - it shouldn't be any harder choosing between Divine Smite and Find Steed than it is choosing between Protection from Poison and Find Steed. What makes DS so good on an EA class is that it has no action cost to cast (and you can cast it without any S or M component hassle), so you can cast it without interfering with the other things you were going to do anyway.
Meanwhile, if you do have analysis paralysis between DS and other spells, you should have analysis paralysis between choices like Entangle or attacking twice, or Ensnaring Strike and using your bonus action to attack, if you're using twf, like Rangers are encouraged to with access to the fighting style. That's the bit I don't like - that Rangers have no way to use their spell slots (again, other than Primeval Awareness) in a way that fits in with their combat options.
Like I said, Divine Smite is just an actionless, componentless spell you don't have to prepare. Also, it has a decent upcast. Anything fitting that criteria would make Ranger feel better, or you could nerf it - the Bladesinger version of this costs a reaction, which is fine. Rangers are written to fit many of the similar memes to Bladesingers - that is, they're not intended to be melee tanks like Paladins are, so charging them a reaction is less painful. The Moon Druid one costs a bonus action, which is no good if you're going to give Rangers a bunch of bonus action spells and the twf style. And I was only focused on combat magic to avoid going off topic, since that's what we were discussing. It would be far more thematic to give a Ranger a utility-based way to spend their spells that just happens to have non-zero overlap with combat. For example, imagine being able to burn a spell slot as part of making any ability check in order to grant that check Reliable [X], where X is Spell Level * 5, max 20 (just like how Divine Smite stops upcasting at SL 4). Suddenly, Rangers are incredible at ability checks in adverse conditions, because that would make Disadvantage hurt them a lot less - and the ability is deliberately very niche, because the cost/benefit ratio there in most cases is abysmal. There's no need to make them OP to make them feel like their magic is more seamlessly integrated into the rest of their abilities.
AND many of the ranger spells are concentration (which I see as a good thing) so last over great amounts of time, perhaps many combats.
Concentration reduces spell duration (because you might accidentally lose concentration), it doesn't increase it. Produce Flame is strictly better than it would be if it required concentration.
AND many ranger spells benefit greatly from being upcast with a higher spell slot.
AND unlike the plethora of paladin spells that do single target damage in slightly different ways, ranger spells have tactical benefits that are only limited by the player's/character's imagination.
Folks complain about ranger bonus action clog, but paladin standard action clog WAY overshadows it. Look how many paladin class features, subclass features, and spells have "...as an action..." as part of them. Decisions...decisions...decisions...
Comparing the two spell lists in these terms (duration, upcasting, and compatibility with creative uses) would be interesting. I've never sat down and done it. I guess we should start with the most obviously good ones from each class's level 1 set, since we want to discuss upcasting.
Below, I'll list Durations for any spell lasting 10 minutes or more. I'll list spells available for an L4 caster for both of them, assuming casting stat bonus +3. I'll ignore for both of them problems inherent in overcoming a save, just like I'm not giving them a casting stat bonus of +4 for counting spells.
Compelled Duel (Upcast: No, Creativity: Yes, but limited to mobility shenanigans)
Detect Magic (Upcast: No, Creativity: No, Duration: 10 minutes) <-- Also a Ranger spell, and mandatory in any party, but neither class really wants to take it - you want this on a ritual caster, ideally a wizard.
Heroism (Upcast: Yes, Creativity: No) - most Paladins would rather cast Divine Favor on themselves, but Heroism is still a good spell.
Thunderous Smite - Certainly not a bad spell, but Wrathful is hard to beat.
Ranger:
Absorb Elements (Upcast: Yes, but terrible, Creativity: No) <-- Absolutely top notch spell, cannot overstate this. Easily one of the best L1 spells in the game. No notes.
Ensnaring Strike (Upcast: Yes, but terrible, Creativity: Generally No)
Detect Magic (Upcast: No, Creativity: No, Duration: 10 minutes) <-- Also a Ranger spell, and mandatory in any party, but neither class really wants to take it - you want this on a ritual caster, ideally a wizard.
Goodberry (Upcast: No, Creativity: No, Duration: 24 hours)
Hunter's Mark (Upcast: Famously yes, Creativity: No, Duration: Minimum 1 hour)
Longstrider (Upcast: Yes, Creativity: No, Duration: 1 hour, not concentration)
Notable spells omitted from the list above:
Alarm (Upcast: No, Creativity: No, Duration: 8 hours) is one of the best L1 spells in the game, easily - but this is where we run into the problem of Rangers being half casters, non-Ritual casters, and know-casters all rolled into one. Basically, the same problems as Detect Magic, but not as absolutely vital to a functioning party.
Beast Bond (Upcast: No, Creativity: Yes, Duration: 10 minutes) is awesome on a Beast Master, but that's subclass specific - Rangers as a class don't have beast companions for this to work on.
I'm not really seeing a clear winner, here, in terms of what we're looking at. Both classes have spells I didn't list, including some spells both get, like Cure Wounds (since both classes have far better things to do with their time and energy than cast Cure Wounds). Paladins don't have anything as good as Hunter's Mark in terms of DPR (Hunter's Mark is radically better than Divine Smite when you're using L1 slots), but Wrathful Smite is easily competitive with Entangling Strike. Rangers have one or two spells worth upcasting in this list, Paladins have about the same number. Neither class has real access to "creativity" fueled spells - Paladins have a couple, Rangers have a couple. Rangers do have a duration advantage at this spell level, though - Longstrider and Goodberry and Hunter's Mark blow the Paladin out of the water.
Let’s also not forget about the strength/charisma split for the paladin class. Many of their spells and effects need a high spell saving throw DC. Not so with most of the best ranger spells. Paladins have even less reason to boost their main weapon attack stat because they are so much a caster. So now they are using smite just to try and keep up.
I find the ranger spell list to be pretty solid. The problem is they don't have access to a lot of spells and most will never see use. For some reason, they are spontaneous spellcasters and not prepared ones. I don't recall how it was in the TSR days, but they prepared their spells in 3.X and the D&D Next playtest. And it makes more sense that they would be, since it allows them to literally prepare for the challenges of the day. But that was stripped from them, and their subclasses don't grant as many bonus spells as anyone else.
AD&D 2e rangers cast spells like Priests, but only from the animal and plant spheres and only for the first three spell levels.... They also didn't start learning spells until 8th level.
1e rangers I don't remember as well but IIRC they learned specific spells more like the 5e ranger (again, been a while could be wrong). They could pick spells off the druid or magic user (wizard) list.
Come to think of it, that might be what the Sword of the Arcane Order from 3.5 was inspired by (an option that let 3.5 Rangers prepare wizard spells. It was cool).
For completeness' sake, 4e rangers didn't know spells at all (although AEDU kinda made everything spell-like anyways).
Prepared tbh would make a lot more sense for them. The whole rugged survivalist with magic ought to be the sort of character to plan to have the right spell for the occasion, not just shrug because they only has hunter's mark and hail of thorns so there's no room for anything with specific utility.
in all 3 you can select your spells on a daily basis, in 1e you got Druid spells first so could select from the full list, then you got mage spells but you had to learn them like a mage and could select/ memorize them as you chose each day. In 2e you got priest spells of the plant and animal domains only. I wouldn’t mind going back to being able to select my spells each day whether from a list “offered to me” by my deity/nature or from some sort of spellbooks. the 3e ranger gets to freely select divine spells. He also gets 5 favored enemies (at levels 1, 5, 10, 15, & 20).
I think when looking at ranger spells you need to try and look at what you can do mundanely. for example taking animal friendship and a high wis animal handling build is kind of redundant. same with freedom of movement and high str athletics builds .
Pre tashas, I tended to take a feat early on to enhance my spell casting. (ritual caster or magic initiate) I do not consider this a bad thing (or even necessary for ranger builds), But it would have been nice to get either prepared spells or ritual caster (especially for druidic warriors). It just made it a bigger focus for certain builds. For example a human variant ritual caster druid ranger can get beast sense earlier (assuming you can get the scroll to copy) to either use on a druid or beast companion.
When I do this I tend to have the freedom to take experimental Bad spells and try them out. cordon of arrows has become a new Favorite. I have even found use for find traps (which too many youtubers add to their worst spell lists). I have even taken over the alarm spell from a wizard on occasion When I would never** take alarm on a straight ranger build.
** never might not actually be true on a unpopular high intelligence low wisdom build. as alarm can help for some ambush and watch situations. see comment above on skill overlap.
If you take some form of magical feat/enhancement you no longer need tashas awareness.
Primeval awareness is better than people give it credit for. One example is it beats non-detection and possibly nystuls magic aura. This is actually huge.
If you take some form of magical feat/enhancement you no longer need tashas awareness.
Primeval awareness is better than people give it credit for. One example is it beats non-detection and possibly nystuls magic aura. This is actually huge.
If you take some form of magical feat/enhancement you no longer need tashas awareness.
Primeval awareness is better than people give it credit for. One example is it beats non-detection and possibly nystuls magic aura. This is actually huge.
Another is range flexibility.
It does beat that stuff but the information is pretty useless in my experience.
I like primeval awareness and use it regularly, however, if I could change one thing about it I change it from taking a spell slot to being usable proficiency bonus times a day.
The design of it means it's a great thing to use at the end of an adventuring day allowing prep casters and to plan spells for the next day. Or allow purchase of creature specfic items. Holy water, mirrors, stakes and such.
For 1 minute per level of the spell slot you expend, you can sense whether the following types of creatures are present within 1 mile of you (or within up to 6 miles if you are in your favored terrain): aberrations, celestials, dragons, elementals, fey, fiends, and undead. This feature doesn’t reveal the creatures’ location or number.
A mile is a HUGE region to just know its there....especially outdoors. It costs a precious slot and gives the lowest amount of information I can possibly fathom for a spell slot.
"Upcasting" is even worse as it just makes it a few mins longer....its terrible information for what you are giving up. As suggested if it was free a number of times per day equal to WIS mod or PB then I agree it would be useful.
As of now the trade off is terrible and thus its not really worth it IMO.
Yes! 100%
AND many of the ranger spells are concentration (which I see as a good thing) so last over great amounts of time, perhaps many combats.
AND many ranger spells benefit greatly from being upcast with a higher spell slot.
AND unlike the plethora of paladin spells that do single target damage in slightly different ways, ranger spells have tactical benefits that are only limited by the player's/character's imagination.
Folks complain about ranger bonus action clog, but paladin standard action clog WAY overshadows it. Look how many paladin class features, subclass features, and spells have "...as an action..." as part of them. Decisions...decisions...decisions...
It's a particularly weak argument that Rangers are better designed because they have fewer ways to use their spell slots - any Paladin can just ignore Divine Smite. It's an optional ability. A Paladin refusing to use Divine Smite is just a Ranger with more spells per day that can be swapped around, in terms of amount of magic. Granted, the two of you, Squiggit and Envoy, might suffer from choice paralysis between spells and smiting, but that's on you. Divine Smite is functionally just another spell in your toolkit - it shouldn't be any harder choosing between Divine Smite and Find Steed than it is choosing between Protection from Poison and Find Steed. What makes DS so good on an EA class is that it has no action cost to cast (and you can cast it without any S or M component hassle), so you can cast it without interfering with the other things you were going to do anyway.
Meanwhile, if you do have analysis paralysis between DS and other spells, you should have analysis paralysis between choices like Entangle or attacking twice, or Ensnaring Strike and using your bonus action to attack, if you're using twf, like Rangers are encouraged to with access to the fighting style. That's the bit I don't like - that Rangers have no way to use their spell slots (again, other than Primeval Awareness) in a way that fits in with their combat options.
Like I said, Divine Smite is just an actionless, componentless spell you don't have to prepare. Also, it has a decent upcast. Anything fitting that criteria would make Ranger feel better, or you could nerf it - the Bladesinger version of this costs a reaction, which is fine. Rangers are written to fit many of the similar memes to Bladesingers - that is, they're not intended to be melee tanks like Paladins are, so charging them a reaction is less painful. The Moon Druid one costs a bonus action, which is no good if you're going to give Rangers a bunch of bonus action spells and the twf style. And I was only focused on combat magic to avoid going off topic, since that's what we were discussing. It would be far more thematic to give a Ranger a utility-based way to spend their spells that just happens to have non-zero overlap with combat. For example, imagine being able to burn a spell slot as part of making any ability check in order to grant that check Reliable [X], where X is Spell Level * 5, max 20 (just like how Divine Smite stops upcasting at SL 4). Suddenly, Rangers are incredible at ability checks in adverse conditions, because that would make Disadvantage hurt them a lot less - and the ability is deliberately very niche, because the cost/benefit ratio there in most cases is abysmal. There's no need to make them OP to make them feel like their magic is more seamlessly integrated into the rest of their abilities.
Yes, I could choose to play my character worse if I wanted to. That's pretty immaterial here though.
Concentration reduces spell duration (because you might accidentally lose concentration), it doesn't increase it. Produce Flame is strictly better than it would be if it required concentration.
Comparing the two spell lists in these terms (duration, upcasting, and compatibility with creative uses) would be interesting. I've never sat down and done it. I guess we should start with the most obviously good ones from each class's level 1 set, since we want to discuss upcasting.
Below, I'll list Durations for any spell lasting 10 minutes or more. I'll list spells available for an L4 caster for both of them, assuming casting stat bonus +3. I'll ignore for both of them problems inherent in overcoming a save, just like I'm not giving them a casting stat bonus of +4 for counting spells.
Paladin (5 spells prepared):
Ranger:
I'm not really seeing a clear winner, here, in terms of what we're looking at. Both classes have spells I didn't list, including some spells both get, like Cure Wounds (since both classes have far better things to do with their time and energy than cast Cure Wounds). Paladins don't have anything as good as Hunter's Mark in terms of DPR (Hunter's Mark is radically better than Divine Smite when you're using L1 slots), but Wrathful Smite is easily competitive with Entangling Strike. Rangers have one or two spells worth upcasting in this list, Paladins have about the same number. Neither class has real access to "creativity" fueled spells - Paladins have a couple, Rangers have a couple. Rangers do have a duration advantage at this spell level, though - Longstrider and Goodberry and Hunter's Mark blow the Paladin out of the water.
Quinn, I think you’re only strengthening the argument about paladins being railroaded into divine smite.
Don’t forget about play style too. Forced melee.
I think you’re making too big a deal about loosing concentration for the ranger.
Let’s also not forget about the strength/charisma split for the paladin class. Many of their spells and effects need a high spell saving throw DC. Not so with most of the best ranger spells. Paladins have even less reason to boost their main weapon attack stat because they are so much a caster. So now they are using smite just to try and keep up.
I find the ranger spell list to be pretty solid. The problem is they don't have access to a lot of spells and most will never see use. For some reason, they are spontaneous spellcasters and not prepared ones. I don't recall how it was in the TSR days, but they prepared their spells in 3.X and the D&D Next playtest. And it makes more sense that they would be, since it allows them to literally prepare for the challenges of the day. But that was stripped from them, and their subclasses don't grant as many bonus spells as anyone else.
AD&D 2e rangers cast spells like Priests, but only from the animal and plant spheres and only for the first three spell levels.... They also didn't start learning spells until 8th level.
1e rangers I don't remember as well but IIRC they learned specific spells more like the 5e ranger (again, been a while could be wrong). They could pick spells off the druid or magic user (wizard) list.
Come to think of it, that might be what the Sword of the Arcane Order from 3.5 was inspired by (an option that let 3.5 Rangers prepare wizard spells. It was cool).
For completeness' sake, 4e rangers didn't know spells at all (although AEDU kinda made everything spell-like anyways).
Prepared tbh would make a lot more sense for them. The whole rugged survivalist with magic ought to be the sort of character to plan to have the right spell for the occasion, not just shrug because they only has hunter's mark and hail of thorns so there's no room for anything with specific utility.
here are a couple of links to early rangers: 1e ranger , 2e ranger , 3e ranger
in all 3 you can select your spells on a daily basis, in 1e you got Druid spells first so could select from the full list, then you got mage spells but you had to learn them like a mage and could select/ memorize them as you chose each day. In 2e you got priest spells of the plant and animal domains only. I wouldn’t mind going back to being able to select my spells each day whether from a list “offered to me” by my deity/nature or from some sort of spellbooks. the 3e ranger gets to freely select divine spells. He also gets 5 favored enemies (at levels 1, 5, 10, 15, & 20).
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
I think when looking at ranger spells you need to try and look at what you can do mundanely. for example taking animal friendship and a high wis animal handling build is kind of redundant. same with freedom of movement and high str athletics builds .
Pre tashas, I tended to take a feat early on to enhance my spell casting. (ritual caster or magic initiate) I do not consider this a bad thing (or even necessary for ranger builds), But it would have been nice to get either prepared spells or ritual caster (especially for druidic warriors). It just made it a bigger focus for certain builds. For example a human variant ritual caster druid ranger can get beast sense earlier (assuming you can get the scroll to copy) to either use on a druid or beast companion.
When I do this I tend to have the freedom to take experimental Bad spells and try them out. cordon of arrows has become a new Favorite. I have even found use for find traps (which too many youtubers add to their worst spell lists). I have even taken over the alarm spell from a wizard on occasion When I would never** take alarm on a straight ranger build.
** never might not actually be true on a unpopular high intelligence low wisdom build. as alarm can help for some ambush and watch situations. see comment above on skill overlap.
Now with Tasha's you get a bunch of great nature themed utility spells instead of primeval awareness so that's a plus.
Overall I would have liked them being a prepared caster much better but it's still better now then it was
If you take some form of magical feat/enhancement you no longer need tashas awareness.
Primeval awareness is better than people give it credit for. One example is it beats non-detection and possibly nystuls magic aura. This is actually huge.
Another is range flexibility.
It does beat that stuff but the information is pretty useless in my experience.
How is knowing what isn’t a nearby not a benefit?
I like primeval awareness and use it regularly, however, if I could change one thing about it I change it from taking a spell slot to being usable proficiency bonus times a day.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
The design of it means it's a great thing to use at the end of an adventuring day allowing prep casters and to plan spells for the next day. Or allow purchase of creature specfic items. Holy water, mirrors, stakes and such.
For 1 minute per level of the spell slot you expend, you can sense whether the following types of creatures are present within 1 mile of you (or within up to 6 miles if you are in your favored terrain): aberrations, celestials, dragons, elementals, fey, fiends, and undead. This feature doesn’t reveal the creatures’ location or number.
A mile is a HUGE region to just know its there....especially outdoors. It costs a precious slot and gives the lowest amount of information I can possibly fathom for a spell slot.
"Upcasting" is even worse as it just makes it a few mins longer....its terrible information for what you are giving up. As suggested if it was free a number of times per day equal to WIS mod or PB then I agree it would be useful.
As of now the trade off is terrible and thus its not really worth it IMO.
There is no real guarantee that the thing will be there the next day though....
For the trade its a terrible value.
Petty complaints just to undervalue information.
Information is always useful you just have to know how to parse and or processes it. Which you have admitted you don't.
Tracking is a job for other ranger abilities not primeval awareness.
Preparation is primeval awareness job.