Just to complete the marine ranger here is a proposed spell list that they would have. Like the other subclass specific lists these are in addition to the spells they normally list and don’t count against their spells known number. Listed by spell level. L1) fog cloud L2) gust of wind L3) water walking (because they already get water breathing as a separate ability - these two could certainly be switched) L4) control water, conjure marine animals (new spell- would work exactly like conjure woodland creatures but the creatures would be marine creatures) L5) Cnidarian cloud (new spell - would work like insect plague but with jellyfish and it would be poison damage, the poisoned state on a fail and paralyzed on a critical failure)
please check the original post for this I made some edits this morning.
Personally, my ideal Expanded Spell List for a water-based Ranger would be:
L1- Create or Destroy WaterL
L2- Misty Step
L3- Tidal Wave
L4- Control Water
L5- Maelstrom
I'd also give them the Shape Water Cantrip for free and I'd give them the ability to walk on water at 7th (and breathe air and water, and not be hindered by underwater combat rules.)
Personally, my ideal Expanded Spell List for a water-based Ranger would be:
L1- Create or Destroy WaterL
L2- Misty Step
L3- Tidal Wave
L4- Control Water
L5- Maelstrom
I'd also give them the Shape Water Cantrip for free and I'd give them the ability to walk on water at 7th (and breathe air and water, and not be hindered by underwater combat rules.)
I didn’t take create/ destroy for a couple of reasons: A) if you are out on the ocean or a Great Lake what is destroying a (relatively) small volume of water going to do for you? B) while the ability to create fresh water is certainly needed/useful is it really so important that it needs to be a feature? I chose fog cloud and gust of wind for the level 1 & 2 spells as they have multiple possible uses for ship borne combat and travel and my suspicion is that for tier 1 characters ship borne activities are far more likely to occur than subsurface activities. Yes the shape water cantrip makes sense I was trying to be conservative about abilities but have no problem adding it.
if you check my edits I do actually agree they should have both walk on water and water breathing I can see giving both at L7 either as innate abilities or single use/ d or PB Uses/ LR spell like abilities. They are both 3rd level spells and rangers don’t normally get those till L9. tidal wave and maelstrom also make sense as level 3 & 5 spells if you want to keep the list canon, but I do like my quickly homebrew spells if your willing to go off canon.
edit: your right at L3 when they become a marine ranger they should get to ignore the underwater fighting rules just as other underwater creatures do.
Here is another try, I’ve never considered the arcane archer to be a fighter and always felt it should be a ranger subclass instead. So I looked at it and realized it is really nerfed. It’s basically an archery fighter with 2 special attacks per short rest - lots of options for those 2 attacks but only 2 Special attacks. so here is my first try at a Ranger Arcane Archer:
L3: Arcane shot as the fighter version but proficiency bonus times per short/ long rest; clairvoyance as a spell like ability Pb/rest; spells( don’t count against spells known as always): L1) Hail of Thorns; L2) Melf’s Acid Arrow; L3) Energy Arrows (flame arrows but you get to choose the energy type: fire/cold/lightning/acid/thunder); L4) Arcane Eye ( I couldn’t find an archery based L4 spell but an archer should always be able to see their targets clearly and this helps that); L5) Swift Quiver.
L7: misty step Pb times / Long rest
L11: Arcane archer improvements as the fighter class, you are now able to fire an additional arrow shot as a bonus action (giving you a total of 3 arrows each turn). (Edit: as compared to a fighter’s 3 arrows due to 3 attacks)
usually at class or subclass abilities have at least some special twist to them Like if they mimic a spell not being counterspell-able or have a unique utility attached to them.
one example is : some of the phb ranger benefits is that the abilities beat magical ones or forms of magical detection. pass without a trace is great but it leaves a simple aura. hide in plain sight does not. or the tasha's version cant be counter spelled.
Fair enough but for a rough draft to identify the powers spells can be used. Sort out the powers and abilities and then refine the details. You see anything wrong with the basic set ups of either subclass? Anyone else see anything that could use major changes?
since I put the other 2 here I'll add this one but I think I'll repost them as separate threads and we can move on to other topics.
Primeval Guardian (Ranger Subclass)
Level 3 Benefits: 1) Your choice of one of the following 2 options: A) Burning Blade – your connection to nature causes your melee weapon to be coated in a contact poison sap that does 1D4 poison damage in addition to the normal damage of your B) Barbed Weapon – your connection to nature causes your missile weapons/ammo to sprout barbs as you attack with them. These barbs do an additional 1 D4 piercing damage on a hit.
2) Your connection to the plants around you allows you to feel the ground motions within 10 feet of you granting you a tremor sense allowing you to detect and locate invisible and hidden creatures within this range. You do not have disadvantage on attacks against such creatures even if you cannot see them or hear them.
3) You gain the following spells as spells known but they don’t count against the number of spells you can know.
Level 7 Benefit: Plant Walk – you may use this ability your proficiency bonus number of times per short or long rest. You are able to step between one patch of plants and another instantly without provoking attacks of opportunity at either end of the step. The patches cannot be further apart than your normal movement rate.
Level 11 Benefits: 1) The damage from your Burning Blade or Barbed Weapon ability increases to 2D4 of the appropriate type. 2) You select one of the two options below: A) Flying Thorns – When you attack with a missile weapon your connection with nature empowers the missile to split into a number of identical missiles allowing you to make a separate attack roll against each foe within a 10 foot radius of the initial target. B) Sweeping Limbs – like a the limbs of a wind driven tree you sweep your weapon(s) around you making an attack against each foe in reach. You make a separate attack roll for each foe.
Level 15 Benefit: Oaken Body – your attunement with the plant realm toughens your body so that you gain a natural armor class of 16 (+ your dexterity bonus) and you become resistant to non magical weapons.
As a basic idea, I think discussing the missing subclasses/archetypes is a good part of the thread. However for actual homebrewing/design I suggest creating a new one. Then interested parties could participate as they see fit and those that are more interested in "table based" ranger topics to get to what they want easier.
I think there is a discussion to be had about skill checks and how they relate to play and specifically the rangers and the exploration pillar. there seems to be a consistent vagueness when it comes to nature and survival checks when doing out of combat encounter design.
I moved the subclasses into separate threads for just that purpose.
my suspicion is that it’s not really the skill checks themselves, it’s the players and DMs not having enough exploration experience IRL to know what to ask and where to set the DCs for the checks. I’ll grant that those of us that like rangers are probably more likely to have some than most players but what about DMs? How do you tell how old the tracks are, how do you tell how many are present. What do you look for to tell the weather tomorrow? Where do you look for water in the desert? Are there any animals that can lead you to water? Etc. if you don’t know something about exploration, survival, and nature how can you adjudicate it without detailed help. Xanther’s tables are a start but they are basically wandering monster tables and don’t help. Frankly the Boy Scout handbook is more useful for this.
Just asking about mundane cures for poison or disease usually caused the dms to shut down. it usually ends with to why don't you just get the spell or ask a cleric to remove it or you cant.
Another area is preparation for environments a desert ranger would know about what heat that causes "exhaustion" and the tools that would help with it.
another thing is supplies and materials. crafting takes so much gold but it never says what you purchase. a ranger should be able to know how to bypass that purchase step and find it naturally(although they may have to adventure to get it)
I think it comes down to encounter design and goal of skill checks.
how many times are skill checks added that have no real effect on the game. Even status conditions gained while exploring added one day but then slept off or worn off before even the next encounter. some times it creates tension but most of the time its becomes no big deal. Instead it should be foreshadowing for the next encounter.
another good way is to allow skill checks such as nature or survival to affect time sensitive issues. The stolen eggs are being moved in several shipments each delay means one more shipment goes out and lessens the rescue reward. Or similarly caring for things. keep this plant/animal heathy while transporting it to distant land. each failure lessens a quality value while success may cause it to go up.
skills should also affect optional encounter designs, If we miss this check we have an encounter increasing the overall difficulty bit by bit.t
then there is optional rewards, like pelt harvesting, poison harvesting, unique animals or specific use plants like in "tomb of antihalation or some other modules" There are even adventures league custom creatures that can be acquired via skill checks. (Familiars and pets.)
all good ideas but the basic problem of not really knowing what you're doing in the wilds is a major cause of the noneffective skill checks. I've had DMs (and like to think I'm one of them) that have had extensive experiences in the wilds and they generally do a better job of keeping the skill checks on task and meaningful. same for players if they have the experience they know what to ask for or when to take the things the DM is telling them and make use of it. example: the party is in the desert and has been following tracks all night (if you can you hike at night not during the day in the deserts) its sunrise and I the DM have you roll perception and so you notice bees flying around. if you don't ask for a check on what or where the bees are going your going to walk right by a spring slightly uphill of you and maybe run out of water and die. if you have some desert experience you might know that bees need water regularly so their hives are always close to permanent water sources.
if you don’t know something about exploration, survival, and nature how can you adjudicate it without detailed help.
I don't really agree. You don't need to know how to pick a lock IRL to use thieves' tools in 5e... or how to actually wield a sword to make attack rolls. You shouldn't be asking your players for that knowledge for other checks either.
All the player should have to do is tell you they're going to look for fresh water or food, then you call for the appropriate check and if they roll well they find it. You can use that information to explain how the character does it... but sending a character who's ostensibly a survival expert off to die because their player didn't know why your offhand comment about bees was important is pretty cheap.
you CAN play it as a table top version of a computer game yes. The DM ( who knows nothing) can tell you to make a roll for finding water and if you make it he says you found water. I will accept that that is gaming but it sure as hell ain't ROLEPLAYING to my mind. I've played with groups where that is what happens and they typically break up fairly quickly. I've played with groups that actually get into the roles of their characters like table top acting and maybe even do some research even if its only reading some books to get enough background to ask reasonable questions or give reasonable answers. D & D is a tabletop ROLE PLAYING game not a table top board game - roll the die to see how far you go, oh you hit the take acard square what does your card say to do?
whether or not the dm or the players understand the details of said skill checks is secondary to the actual adventure design. i am pretty sure Its more about consequences.
How many rolls does it take to achieve a desired affect. a bit of lore/or object collection that the players might find a use for should be easy and simple. this is because it requires extra effort to make it useful. Status inconveniences usually take 1-3 rolls or steps. A failed attack or enemy resource spent(spellslots ). Shen usually a save to see if the effect sticks. and finally removal rules or rolls. sometimes poisons or diseases have a once you succeed you are immune type condition . This should be taken into account when traveling in hostile environments weather, diseases or other hazards should start with a detection roll (some knowledge or a perception) then a chance to avoid it via save or extra skill check or smart planning. third would be a dealing with it. spells that give boons to resist or remove the affect. ways to remove the condition.
another big concept is foreshadowing or hint systems. interacting with a skill to acquire a clue to let the players know what to plan for. this can be behind a sill roll to pre-emptively detect or discern those clues or an event where you interact with a lesser weak version to signpost More will be coming later to actually affect the party.
a big problem I see is free information given to non- exploration checks. this is a less common occurrence at tables but it still happens alot. Intimidates that don't require a roll or clerics that auto detect medical death information but then the ranger asks and a roll is required. free or auto successes should be semi-evenly distributed across all classes and skills. the only auto success i see for ranger/exploration types is usually food because the dm doesn't want to deal with tracking it slowing things down. this may not be a bad thing but it still should be a factor in certain senarios. Usually if i want to make food an issue I scale it up. feed a party of 30 instead of just 4-8. it creates more tension and makes a real impact on the story.
you CAN play it as a table top version of a computer game yes. The DM ( who knows nothing) can tell you to make a roll for finding water and if you make it he says you found water. I will accept that that is gaming but it sure as hell ain't ROLEPLAYING to my mind. I've played with groups where that is what happens and they typically break up fairly quickly. I've played with groups that actually get into the roles of their characters like table top acting and maybe even do some research even if its only reading some books to get enough background to ask reasonable questions or give reasonable answers. D & D is a tabletop ROLE PLAYING game not a table top board game - roll the die to see how far you go, oh you hit the take acard square what does your card say to do?
The rules exist to facilitate a fantasy. There is no requirement for the player behind a bard, or character with the entertainer background, to also be skilled with musical instruments, trained as an actor, or even a poet. If they want to get into that, they can, but it's not essential. Likewise, I have zero qualms about someone with 20-200 vision playing an eagle-eyed archer.
This is actually one of the issues with introducing Renaissance firearms (per the DMG) into the game. I don't see the point because the crossbows are already competitive in terms of action economy, damage, and affordability. Case in point, the heavy crossbow is basically a bolt-action rifle.
Whether you intend to or not, you're gatekeeping. Don't do that.
Jonuichi you are fre to play how you like, I expressed my likes and how I feel, I do not appreciate being told how to run my games if you want to say you don’t like it and wouldn’t play.in it that’s fine the phrasing you used is not. You’re right there is no requirement to have experience but as some one who does I can tell you that (at least for me) it makes the play much more enjoyable.
Billy, I could say the same to you; insisting that others must have knowledge in a field in order to play. It's perfectly fine for you to say you prefer to play a particular way. But no DM needs to be familiar with tenants of exploration, survival, and nature to adjudicate or set a DC. And, no, the Boy Scout Handbook isn't that helpful. I've been an Eagle Scout for 19 years. I'd know.
Most people don't have a significant amount of exploration experience. That's not a bad thing; it just is. And they shouldn't need to do homework to play. You don't have the right to impress that upon anyone, but you can certainly reward it with Inspiration.
And all this ignores the fact that the exploration pillar isn't limited to the wilderness. If you're investigating a crime scene or scouring a dungeon, then you're still exploring.
Trying to get nasty are we junior? Let’s not! Jonuichi you are absolutely right you don’t have to have any experience, I’ve DMed for middle school and inner city HS students and for outdoors in the wild they have none and still had fun. My point was never that you can’t play the game that way (which seems to be the way you read it), my point was that if you have the experience you can do much more Character ROLE play and less game mechanics play. I personally prefer to play with others that focus on the character personality and knowledge and less on the mechanics.
all good ideas but the basic problem of not really knowing what you're doing in the wilds is a major cause of the noneffective skill checks. I've had DMs (and like to think I'm one of them) that have had extensive experiences in the wilds and they generally do a better job of keeping the skill checks on task and meaningful. same for players if they have the experience they know what to ask for or when to take the things the DM is telling them and make use of it. example: the party is in the desert and has been following tracks all night (if you can you hike at night not during the day in the deserts) its sunrise and I the DM have you roll perception and so you notice bees flying around. if you don't ask for a check on what or where the bees are going your going to walk right by a spring slightly uphill of you and maybe run out of water and die. if you have some desert experience you might know that bees need water regularly so their hives are always close to permanent water sources.
My character has proficiency in Nature and Survival, I don't. You're basically telling me I have to metagame if I want my character to live, because if my character has skills I don't, those skills are unusable, and if I have skills my character doesn't, I'm not only free to use them, I'm expected to. Compulsory metagaming is seldom much fun.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Just to complete the marine ranger here is a proposed spell list that they would have. Like the other subclass specific lists these are in addition to the spells they normally list and don’t count against their spells known number. Listed by spell level.
L1) fog cloud
L2) gust of wind
L3) water walking (because they already get water breathing as a separate ability - these two could certainly be switched)
L4) control water, conjure marine animals (new spell- would work exactly like conjure woodland creatures but the creatures would be marine creatures)
L5) Cnidarian cloud (new spell - would work like insect plague but with jellyfish and it would be poison damage, the poisoned state on a fail and paralyzed on a critical failure)
please check the original post for this I made some edits this morning.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Personally, my ideal Expanded Spell List for a water-based Ranger would be:
L1- Create or Destroy WaterL
L2- Misty Step
L3- Tidal Wave
L4- Control Water
L5- Maelstrom
I'd also give them the Shape Water Cantrip for free and I'd give them the ability to walk on water at 7th (and breathe air and water, and not be hindered by underwater combat rules.)
I didn’t take create/ destroy for a couple of reasons: A) if you are out on the ocean or a Great Lake what is destroying a (relatively) small volume of water going to do for you? B) while the ability to create fresh water is certainly needed/useful is it really so important that it needs to be a feature?
I chose fog cloud and gust of wind for the level 1 & 2 spells as they have multiple possible uses for ship borne combat and travel and my suspicion is that for tier 1 characters ship borne activities are far more likely to occur than subsurface activities. Yes the shape water cantrip makes sense I was trying to be conservative about abilities but have no problem adding it.
if you check my edits I do actually agree they should have both walk on water and water breathing I can see giving both at L7 either as innate abilities or single use/ d or PB Uses/ LR spell like abilities. They are both 3rd level spells and rangers don’t normally get those till L9.
tidal wave and maelstrom also make sense as level 3 & 5 spells if you want to keep the list canon, but I do like my quickly homebrew spells if your willing to go off canon.
edit: your right at L3 when they become a marine ranger they should get to ignore the underwater fighting rules just as other underwater creatures do.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Here is another try, I’ve never considered the arcane archer to be a fighter and always felt it should be a ranger subclass instead. So I looked at it and realized it is really nerfed. It’s basically an archery fighter with 2 special attacks per short rest - lots of options for those 2 attacks but only 2 Special attacks. so here is my first try at a Ranger Arcane Archer:
L3: Arcane shot as the fighter version but proficiency bonus times per short/ long rest; clairvoyance as a spell like ability Pb/rest; spells( don’t count against spells known as always):
L1) Hail of Thorns; L2) Melf’s Acid Arrow; L3) Energy Arrows (flame arrows but you get to choose the energy type: fire/cold/lightning/acid/thunder); L4) Arcane Eye ( I couldn’t find an archery based L4 spell but an archer should always be able to see their targets clearly and this helps that); L5) Swift Quiver.
L7: misty step Pb times / Long rest
L11: Arcane archer improvements as the fighter class, you are now able to fire an additional arrow shot as a bonus action (giving you a total of 3 arrows each turn). (Edit: as compared to a fighter’s 3 arrows due to 3 attacks)
L15: you gain the Skulker feat.
any thoughts/comments/suggestions?
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
usually at class or subclass abilities have at least some special twist to them Like if they mimic a spell not being counterspell-able or have a unique utility attached to them.
one example is : some of the phb ranger benefits is that the abilities beat magical ones or forms of magical detection. pass without a trace is great but it leaves a simple aura. hide in plain sight does not. or the tasha's version cant be counter spelled.
The devil is in the details so to speak.
Fair enough but for a rough draft to identify the powers spells can be used. Sort out the powers and abilities and then refine the details. You see anything wrong with the basic set ups of either subclass? Anyone else see anything that could use major changes?
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
since I put the other 2 here I'll add this one but I think I'll repost them as separate threads and we can move on to other topics.
Primeval Guardian
(Ranger Subclass)
Level 3 Benefits:
1) Your choice of one of the following 2 options:
A) Burning Blade – your connection to nature causes your melee weapon to be coated in a contact poison sap that does 1D4 poison damage in addition to the normal damage of your
B) Barbed Weapon – your connection to nature causes your missile weapons/ammo to sprout barbs as you attack with them. These barbs do an additional 1 D4 piercing damage on a hit.
2) Your connection to the plants around you allows you to feel the ground motions within 10 feet of you granting you a tremor sense allowing you to detect and locate invisible and hidden creatures within this range. You do not have disadvantage on attacks against such creatures even if you cannot see them or hear them.
3) You gain the following spells as spells known but they don’t count against the number of spells you can know.
Cantrip: Thorn Whip
Level 1: Entangle
Level 2: Barkskin
Level 3: Speak with Plants
Level 4: Grasping Vine
Level 5: Tree Stride
Level 7 Benefit:
Plant Walk – you may use this ability your proficiency bonus number of times per short or long rest. You are able to step between one patch of plants and another instantly without provoking attacks of opportunity at either end of the step. The patches cannot be further apart than your normal movement rate.
Level 11 Benefits:
1) The damage from your Burning Blade or Barbed Weapon ability increases to 2D4 of the appropriate type.
2) You select one of the two options below:
A) Flying Thorns – When you attack with a missile weapon your connection with nature empowers the missile to split into a number of identical missiles allowing you to make a separate attack roll against each foe within a 10 foot radius of the initial target.
B) Sweeping Limbs – like a the limbs of a wind driven tree you sweep your weapon(s) around you making an attack against each foe in reach. You make a separate attack roll for each foe.
Level 15 Benefit:
Oaken Body – your attunement with the plant realm toughens your body so that you gain a natural armor class of 16 (+ your dexterity bonus) and you become resistant to non magical weapons.
your thoughts here or in the new thread please.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
As a basic idea, I think discussing the missing subclasses/archetypes is a good part of the thread. However for actual homebrewing/design I suggest creating a new one. Then interested parties could participate as they see fit and those that are more interested in "table based" ranger topics to get to what they want easier.
I think there is a discussion to be had about skill checks and how they relate to play and specifically the rangers and the exploration pillar. there seems to be a consistent vagueness when it comes to nature and survival checks when doing out of combat encounter design.
I moved the subclasses into separate threads for just that purpose.
my suspicion is that it’s not really the skill checks themselves, it’s the players and DMs not having enough exploration experience IRL to know what to ask and where to set the DCs for the checks. I’ll grant that those of us that like rangers are probably more likely to have some than most players but what about DMs? How do you tell how old the tracks are, how do you tell how many are present. What do you look for to tell the weather tomorrow? Where do you look for water in the desert? Are there any animals that can lead you to water? Etc. if you don’t know something about exploration, survival, and nature how can you adjudicate it without detailed help. Xanther’s tables are a start but they are basically wandering monster tables and don’t help. Frankly the Boy Scout handbook is more useful for this.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Just asking about mundane cures for poison or disease usually caused the dms to shut down. it usually ends with to why don't you just get the spell or ask a cleric to remove it or you cant.
Another area is preparation for environments a desert ranger would know about what heat that causes "exhaustion" and the tools that would help with it.
another thing is supplies and materials. crafting takes so much gold but it never says what you purchase. a ranger should be able to know how to bypass that purchase step and find it naturally(although they may have to adventure to get it)
I think it comes down to encounter design and goal of skill checks.
how many times are skill checks added that have no real effect on the game. Even status conditions gained while exploring added one day but then slept off or worn off before even the next encounter. some times it creates tension but most of the time its becomes no big deal. Instead it should be foreshadowing for the next encounter.
another good way is to allow skill checks such as nature or survival to affect time sensitive issues. The stolen eggs are being moved in several shipments each delay means one more shipment goes out and lessens the rescue reward. Or similarly caring for things. keep this plant/animal heathy while transporting it to distant land. each failure lessens a quality value while success may cause it to go up.
skills should also affect optional encounter designs, If we miss this check we have an encounter increasing the overall difficulty bit by bit.t
then there is optional rewards, like pelt harvesting, poison harvesting, unique animals or specific use plants like in "tomb of antihalation or some other modules" There are even adventures league custom creatures that can be acquired via skill checks. (Familiars and pets.)
all good ideas but the basic problem of not really knowing what you're doing in the wilds is a major cause of the noneffective skill checks. I've had DMs (and like to think I'm one of them) that have had extensive experiences in the wilds and they generally do a better job of keeping the skill checks on task and meaningful. same for players if they have the experience they know what to ask for or when to take the things the DM is telling them and make use of it.
example: the party is in the desert and has been following tracks all night (if you can you hike at night not during the day in the deserts) its sunrise and I the DM have you roll perception and so you notice bees flying around. if you don't ask for a check on what or where the bees are going your going to walk right by a spring slightly uphill of you and maybe run out of water and die. if you have some desert experience you might know that bees need water regularly so their hives are always close to permanent water sources.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
I don't really agree. You don't need to know how to pick a lock IRL to use thieves' tools in 5e... or how to actually wield a sword to make attack rolls. You shouldn't be asking your players for that knowledge for other checks either.
All the player should have to do is tell you they're going to look for fresh water or food, then you call for the appropriate check and if they roll well they find it. You can use that information to explain how the character does it... but sending a character who's ostensibly a survival expert off to die because their player didn't know why your offhand comment about bees was important is pretty cheap.
you CAN play it as a table top version of a computer game yes. The DM ( who knows nothing) can tell you to make a roll for finding water and if you make it he says you found water. I will accept that that is gaming but it sure as hell ain't ROLEPLAYING to my mind. I've played with groups where that is what happens and they typically break up fairly quickly. I've played with groups that actually get into the roles of their characters like table top acting and maybe even do some research even if its only reading some books to get enough background to ask reasonable questions or give reasonable answers. D & D is a tabletop ROLE PLAYING game not a table top board game - roll the die to see how far you go, oh you hit the take acard square what does your card say to do?
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
whether or not the dm or the players understand the details of said skill checks is secondary to the actual adventure design. i am pretty sure Its more about consequences.
How many rolls does it take to achieve a desired affect. a bit of lore/or object collection that the players might find a use for should be easy and simple. this is because it requires extra effort to make it useful. Status inconveniences usually take 1-3 rolls or steps. A failed attack or enemy resource spent(spellslots ). Shen usually a save to see if the effect sticks. and finally removal rules or rolls. sometimes poisons or diseases have a once you succeed you are immune type condition . This should be taken into account when traveling in hostile environments weather, diseases or other hazards should start with a detection roll (some knowledge or a perception) then a chance to avoid it via save or extra skill check or smart planning. third would be a dealing with it. spells that give boons to resist or remove the affect. ways to remove the condition.
another big concept is foreshadowing or hint systems. interacting with a skill to acquire a clue to let the players know what to plan for. this can be behind a sill roll to pre-emptively detect or discern those clues or an event where you interact with a lesser weak version to signpost More will be coming later to actually affect the party.
a big problem I see is free information given to non- exploration checks. this is a less common occurrence at tables but it still happens alot. Intimidates that don't require a roll or clerics that auto detect medical death information but then the ranger asks and a roll is required. free or auto successes should be semi-evenly distributed across all classes and skills. the only auto success i see for ranger/exploration types is usually food because the dm doesn't want to deal with tracking it slowing things down. this may not be a bad thing but it still should be a factor in certain senarios. Usually if i want to make food an issue I scale it up. feed a party of 30 instead of just 4-8. it creates more tension and makes a real impact on the story.
The rules exist to facilitate a fantasy. There is no requirement for the player behind a bard, or character with the entertainer background, to also be skilled with musical instruments, trained as an actor, or even a poet. If they want to get into that, they can, but it's not essential. Likewise, I have zero qualms about someone with 20-200 vision playing an eagle-eyed archer.
This is actually one of the issues with introducing Renaissance firearms (per the DMG) into the game. I don't see the point because the crossbows are already competitive in terms of action economy, damage, and affordability. Case in point, the heavy crossbow is basically a bolt-action rifle.
Whether you intend to or not, you're gatekeeping. Don't do that.
Jonuichi you are fre to play how you like, I expressed my likes and how I feel, I do not appreciate being told how to run my games if you want to say you don’t like it and wouldn’t play.in it that’s fine the phrasing you used is not. You’re right there is no requirement to have experience but as some one who does I can tell you that (at least for me) it makes the play much more enjoyable.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Billy, I could say the same to you; insisting that others must have knowledge in a field in order to play. It's perfectly fine for you to say you prefer to play a particular way. But no DM needs to be familiar with tenants of exploration, survival, and nature to adjudicate or set a DC. And, no, the Boy Scout Handbook isn't that helpful. I've been an Eagle Scout for 19 years. I'd know.
Most people don't have a significant amount of exploration experience. That's not a bad thing; it just is. And they shouldn't need to do homework to play. You don't have the right to impress that upon anyone, but you can certainly reward it with Inspiration.
And all this ignores the fact that the exploration pillar isn't limited to the wilderness. If you're investigating a crime scene or scouring a dungeon, then you're still exploring.
Trying to get nasty are we junior? Let’s not! Jonuichi you are absolutely right you don’t have to have any experience, I’ve DMed for middle school and inner city HS students and for outdoors in the wild they have none and still had fun. My point was never that you can’t play the game that way (which seems to be the way you read it), my point was that if you have the experience you can do much more Character ROLE play and less game mechanics play. I personally prefer to play with others that focus on the character personality and knowledge and less on the mechanics.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
My character has proficiency in Nature and Survival, I don't. You're basically telling me I have to metagame if I want my character to live, because if my character has skills I don't, those skills are unusable, and if I have skills my character doesn't, I'm not only free to use them, I'm expected to. Compulsory metagaming is seldom much fun.