I have a dilemma. I have a Ranger (beast master) that reached LVL 5 and want to swap a spell of LVL 1 for a different one. I am deciding between picking Entangle and Ensnaring strike.
I've read several forums and most people recommend Entangle. However for my build and party I think Ensnaring strike might work better.
Our Wizard already has Web and I am taking Spike Growth as my LVL 2 spell, so we already do have some area control spells.
My ranger is attacking almost always with a long bow and has a +10 bonus to Hit/DC (I did not pick Sharp Shooter @ LVL 4, instead I chose to boost DEX) so a large amount of the time I do hit. I usually use my bonus action to command my beast (of the land) to attack. My other spells are Cure Wounds, Hunter's Mark and now Spike Growth.
Ensnaring strike says "The next time you hit a creature with a weapon attack before this spell ends...", so am I correct in assuming - when I now have an extra attack, in case I hit the same target both times, do I make that target make the saving throw twice (in case he fails the first time...), or perhaps also target two different targets and if I hit, make them both make the saving throw on the same turn?
This would seem a lot better to me, because in comparison, once the enemies trapped in the 20 ft of Entangle save themselves, they will simply leave and not return most of the time. But with Ensnaring strike they could be forced to make the Save throw over and over no matter where they are standing. This seems much better to me, but the other forums mostly say the opposite. So I`m not really sure if I`m getting this right...
One more side note, might also be important = I am considering multiclassing after this level, (or perhaps after level 9 because I`d take Conjure Animals) to maybe something like Rogue/Cleric or perhaps Fighter. Seems Ranger does not really get a lot more after these levels compared to other classes.
I`m adding a poll here, I would highly appreciate your advice, ANY opinions are very welcome!
It says the next hit, so if your first attack hits, that is when the target makes the save or be restrained. Your second attack doesn’t matter as the first one uses the spell. It would say something like “each time you hit a creature” if it was meant to be used more than once.
So 1d6 damage isn’t much, but if you can keep the creature restrained it helps your party get advantage. And since it is single target it avoids friendly fire.
entangle can have friendly fire and only restrains when you cast it, so if an enemy moves through the area after it was cast they don’t have to make any saves. But it is difficult terrain so it is good for control.
I say, if your party already has some aoe control spells and you tend to fire from range while others move in for melee then go for Ensnaring Strike.
I would go with entangle because it is a really good battle opener.
As for Ensnaring Strike it only works on your next hit. So if you have Extra Attack and hit with both attacks it procs on the first hit but not the second. The upside is if your attacks miss you can try again with future attacks as long as you maintain concentration on the spell and it hasn't expired. Once you proc it the target is restrained for the remaining duration as long as you maintain concentration and they fail their save.
So for Ensnaring Strike it affects only one target, requires you to hit, requires the target to fail there save, and only takes a bonus action. Entangle takes an action but can hit multiple enemies, and just requires a failed save. Also Entangle doesn't allow allies of the target to try and free it.
Entangle does have a lot of overlap with Web but Entangle only restrains creatures caught in the initial AoE. So after Entangle is cast it is safe for melee character to go in and attack the enemies caught by it.
Either way restrained is a pretty nasty condition and both are useful spells. Given your party make up Ensnaring Strike may be the better option but I really like Entangle. One perk of Ensnaring Strike with a bow is forcing flying creatures without hover to plummet out of the sky.
Ensnaring Strike is not a good spell. It is incredibly unreliable as you have to hit with an attack roll and then have the enemy fail a saving throw. Strength is a very common save for enemies to be adept at passing, and anything large or larger has advantage. And nothing happens if they pass. It's just a wasted spell slot and bonus action. There is so much working against you for a single target effect. And while a bonus action casting might be beneficial for some, it's actually quite awkward for a beast master, as one of their main strengths is always having a weaponized bonus action thanks to their beast companion.
Entangle on the other hand is an S tier 1st level spell. Being able to effect multiple targets, shape the battlefield and have a useful effect even if the enemy makes their save are all hallmarks of what to look for in really good control spells. And as an action cast, it actually works better with the subclass.
With entangle you can engage the entire battlefield of an encounter by yourself on turn 1. Entangle some enemies here, send the beast companion there, and put yourself in a useful spot somewhere else. It really isn't close what the better option is.
Also, I wouldn't worry about overlap with other control effects from the party. In fact, being able to team up and cover large swaths of the battlefield can be very potent. I would say ensnaring strike actually has less synergy with web users than entangle does.
So, here's the problems with Ensnaring Strike, as some people have already pointed out.
For one, it's a Bonus Action to cast, which competes with your Primal Companion... if you really just want to keep an enemy held in place, you could send your Primal Companion to grapple them without spending any additional resources.
For another, it takes your concentration which, yeah, Entangle does too, but Ensnaring Strike takes up your Concentration whether or not it succeeds. It's possible to cast Ensnaring Strike, miss both your attacks, then you're basically concentrating on it for a round while no effects are taking place. Meanwhile, if you cast Entangle and the target you're trying to capture succeeds their saving throw, they're still surrounded with difficult terrain, giving you some battlefield control.
The main benefit of Ensnaring Strike is that it allows you to still deal damage at the cost of drastically reducing the AOE. It works better as a boost to your attack than as a spell unto itself... but like I said, if your priority is just dealing damage, you're losing your Bonus Action to command your Primal Companion. I think for a different Ranger Subclass you would get more use out of Ensnaring Strike, but if you're going to toss out any BA spells, you have to make sure that it's much more useful than what you could accomplish with your companion.
Optimizing and "picking the right spell" is wonderful on paper, but as you have already mentioned, with a wizard in the party there is a great chance of redundancies with what entangle is designed to do. I have seen some others here mention S tier, being a great opener, and other things about how entangle is so good, and it is. Others still have said ensnaring strike is bad because you have to hit and they get a saving throw. Please keep in mind that a ranger is not a wizard, and that is a different kit of focus, abilities, and party role. Having a wizard in the party is a big deal for this decision as not having one in the party would make this an easy answer, entangle all the way.
You seem worried about "loosing you bonus action". Why? As a ranger, OG or Tasha's, this will happen all of the time. In the same way a full caster is torn between what to use their action and concentration on, rangers have the same for their bonus action. What are you "loosing" for your bonus action for one turn with ensnaring strike? The beats of the land attack? So, what then? Is that 1d8 + 2 + 3? What do you loose as a ranger with extra attack NOT shooting your bow? More than that, I'll bet. Rangers are pin point tacticians and strikers. Rangers should generally not be using their spell slot resource for battlefield control openers unless the party has zero other way of making that happen. As an archer ranger you should be taking care of very precise tactical necessities. Ensnaring strike is not a every battle, battle opener spell. It is a spell that you can shoot when the battle is well under way to swing the odds in your party's favor in a clutch moment.
Everything depends on the individual situation of the party + enemies + battlefield + win condition, but generally speaking, taking a party striker (ranger with a longbow and weaponized bonus action) and putting them in a controller role is likely not good party optimization. Let your wizard do their thing. They have more spell slots, more spells, more variety, and less ability to deal great damage with zero resource expenditure. If your role is the party's backup character, then that is a fun role too, so do what you think will be fun.
Another thing that I see is you talking about multiclassing out of ranger. I am, as several of these others here will attest to, a ranger fan-boy, so I love high level ranger play. I do know that if you want to continue to focus on single target damage with a bow for a ranger than that starts to get tough after level 5-8, and a rogue or fighter multiclass is in your future. Think about this. If you are wanting to focus on single target longbow striker damage, then spells that deal zero damage and use your action are NOT your cup of tea. Spike growth, entangle, cure woulds, while all great spells, are not good for a striker build. They are good for a more diverse ranger build however. Just as folks that have really doubled down on shooting things with a bow for their build bemoan taking conjure animals in later levels, diversifying your spell selection while wanting to fill a role that is hyper focused is tough for anyone, let alone a non full spellcaster.
Ensnaring strike allows you to fire at a single enemy without effecting your allies. It is meant for mid battle tactics, not battle opener tactics. You get two chances to hit your target with extra attack, not two targets to be effective. Yes they get a strength save and large creatures have advantage, but you get to pick you target, not the other way around, so choose wisely. This can be upcast. Is it more damage than hunter's mark or something else? No. But it is damage on top of a debilitating condition for your enemy that is so good when you have allies that can put the hurt down on them.
I mean that's all well and good Frank, but Rangers have painfully few spells known. Fitting both in your arsenal comes at a really big cost, one that I don't think Ensnaring Strike merits. I've had it auto-prepped for 8 levels now with my ancients paladin (who often doesn't use his BA) and I'm confident when I say it's just a bad spell.
I was looking into it a little more, and I realized that Entangle was added to the Ranger spell-list with Tasha's. I think that explains a bit why there's this disparity between the two spells that otherwise seem so similar. Ensnaring Strike was pretty clearly made as the "Ranger Version" of Entangle... something that accomplishes a similar effect, but is designed to pair with Ranger sensibilities (focuses more on additional damage, involves firing an arrow). However, the benefits of the spell are largely outweighed by the greater AOE of Entangle, and the fact that it still provides benefits even if the intended target succeeds on their Saving Throw.
I do agree that there are some situations where Ensnaring Strike is potentially more useful... if a creature is surrounded by allies it's better to use this spell, or if a creature is outside of the range of entangle but within the range of your Longbow it might be the only way you're stopping someone from escaping. But I think that, more often than not, Entangle is going to have more benefits in more fights.
It's not the best ranger spell, but given the wizard in his party I would go so far as to suggest taking neither entangle or ensnaring strike. Side by side, in a white room, entangle beats ensnaring strike. But for a ranger in an active campaign I bet we'll all find down the road that entangle for rangers is, at least, not as great as people seem to think it is. Everything about it is odd to me. It doesn't mesh well with a ranger's kit, with using an action, not dealing damage, and requiring saving throws. Entangle, and spells like it like the aforementioned web, are available to full casters that are likely building their spell save DC and leaning entirely on spells for their contributions to combat, unlike a martial class. I think entangle is a nice option to have for a ranger, but it definitely isn't a first or even second round pick for them. I mean, why isn't this character looking at pass without trace, absorb elements, healing spirit, aid, or goodberry? With even only one full caster ally in the party, a ranger is contributing more by filling a role that isn't filled by a wizard or other ally.
Also, if rangers have "...painfully few spells known..." then that is even more of a reason not to be picking spells redundant to the party. Optimize the party, not the character.
I think side by side, spell next to spell, saying "...more often than not, Entangle is going to have more benefits in more fights..." is correct. But I don't think that is true for a ranger. And I for sure don't think that is true for a ranger in a party with a wizard or druid.
Have you seriously never seen two characters combine efforts to lock down an entire battlefield with CC? The idea that they should take neither is pretty ill-informed I would say.
I agree that as a ranger your better off picking spells that don't rely on your spellcasting attribute. Pass without Trace is an amazing spell that works the same regardless of what your spellcasting attribute is. Zephyr Strike is an excellent escape tool as a ranged ranger as a first level spell and Pass without Trace or Silence are great 2nd level options.
If that is what this person wants to do with their "...painfully few spells known...", then it is a great choice. But if they want to fill a role instead of double down on one, then that is a great choice too.
I'm so sorry our vision of what is "good" and "bad" don't align, HeironymusZot.
Thanks a lot for your input guys! I see it is not such a straight forward pick indeed - based on mixed reactions.
A side note - we actually have a big party (Wiz, Ranger, Bard, Rogue, Warrior and Paladin). Our paladin is our main healer, wiz (control and damage), bard (boosting and debuffing & some control spells). I`m mostly the support char - shooting from distance and using my beast to slow down and attack one enemy at time + occasional heal...
I mean, why isn't this character looking at pass without trace, absorb elements, healing spirit, aid, or goodberry? With even only one full caster ally in the party, a ranger is contributing more by filling a role that isn't filled by a wizard or other ally.
Yes, I was thinking about these as well! Still not a 100 % decided if I shouldn`t go perhaps for heals instead...
PwT - Seems great for some campaigns, but our party is a really loud one... We invite trouble rather then sneak around if you know what I mean :D
AE - In first 5 LVLs we only encountered someone with those types of dmg 2 or 3 times... I`m looking for something usable most of the time
Aid - Our Bard has a very similar spell adding temporary HP.
Healing spirit/Goodberry - Yes to these two! They are my biggest rivals to 2nd lvl Spike Growth and 1st Entangle/ES...
All things considered perhaps this could provide our team with more depth, since there is 6 of us, and some aditional heal would be better then crowd control spells like Spike Growth, Entangle etc. Afterall our wizard had Web for 2 levels now and only uses it once since our DM really thinks twice before putting our enemies next to each other. On the other hand sometimes even slowing down one enemy is a strong enough action.
Ensnaring strike allows you to fire at a single enemy without effecting your allies. It is meant for mid battle tactics, not battle opener tactics. You get two chances to hit your target with extra attack, not two targets to be effective. Yes they get a strength save and large creatures have advantage, but you get to pick you target, not the other way around, so choose wisely. This can be upcast. Is it more damage than hunter's mark or something else? No. But it is damage on top of a debilitating condition for your enemy that is so good when you have allies that can put the hurt down on them.
You summarized it well! I would add that it`s not always that entangle actually can effect more then one or two enemies at a time, especially when our DM will know that two in our party will have such a spell, he will try to avoid that even more. And once they do free themselves the spell is simply useless for the rest of the minute. However ensnaring strike, I can force a creature (that I chose!) to make the save even in round 2, 3, 4 (or at least I presume the spell works in every round when I hit while active...) Most of the times our fights take at least 4 rounds, and as I said I have +10 to hit!
Although I`m not really closer to picking the spell, I am very thankful for everyone's input!
They already have hunter's mark, cure wounds, spike growth, (I'm assuming with the next two), speak with animals, and best sense.
Absorb elements, ensnaring strike, entangle, fog cloud, goodberry, hail of thorns, and zephyr strike are all great 1st level ranger spells. 3 of these use the ranger's spell save DC. The rest don't. Several are bonus actions. Most use concentration. This player gets to pick one of them, and one of them is almost (but still not as potent) as a spell the wizard in the party already has access to.
Damn I think I didn`t understand Ensnaring Strike properly. I was assuming that after it hits the first time you can then use it on the next rounds as well. But I read some more about this, and it actually ends after the first time you hit.
Is that correct?
If so, then Entangle is surely the better spell. I thought you get to use Ensnaring strike each round until the spell ends (even after you hit), that would be too good...
But Frank you actually had a great point, that made me think - "optimize the party rather than the character".
Considering our wide party, it might be better to go for Goodberry instead of Entangle, and Healing spirit instead of Spike growth. Damn, even more to think about :D
Ensnaring strike "works" the first time you hit a target with a weapon attack. Hopefully they fail their saving throw. If they do fail their saving throw then you can continue concentrating on the spell for a minute (using zero additional action or bonus action). For the entirety of 1 minute that the target doesn't save and you continue to concentrate on the spell, the target is restrained and takes damage at the start of each of their turns.
It is tricky to get to stick, as others have said. But when you do get it to stick it's harder to break out of because it's a straight strength CHECK. You can use it on the target of your choice in the middle of a combat with your fellow rogue, paladin, and warrior, all without effecting them in the slightest aside from possibly giving them advantage to hit one of their targets.
Also remember that any time you don't use you bonus action to command your beast of the land to attack, you still have the options to either move it into a tactical position, to help the rogue get sneak attack, setup for a possible opportunity attack on an enemy, or provide flanking (if you are using that optional rule from the dungeon master's guide), or you can give up one of your attacks from extra attack to let the beast of the land attack anyway. A longbow without hunter's mark is doing 8.5 (1d8 + 4) while your beast of the land is doing 9.5 (1d8 + 2 + 3) damage, with a slightly less chance to hit. More damage if the beast charges.
Instead of thinking of all of this as bonus action clog, think of it all as options at your disposal.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hello lads,
I have a dilemma. I have a Ranger (beast master) that reached LVL 5 and want to swap a spell of LVL 1 for a different one. I am deciding between picking Entangle and Ensnaring strike.
I've read several forums and most people recommend Entangle. However for my build and party I think Ensnaring strike might work better.
Our Wizard already has Web and I am taking Spike Growth as my LVL 2 spell, so we already do have some area control spells.
My ranger is attacking almost always with a long bow and has a +10 bonus to Hit/DC (I did not pick Sharp Shooter @ LVL 4, instead I chose to boost DEX) so a large amount of the time I do hit. I usually use my bonus action to command my beast (of the land) to attack. My other spells are Cure Wounds, Hunter's Mark and now Spike Growth.
Ensnaring strike says "The next time you hit a creature with a weapon attack before this spell ends...", so am I correct in assuming - when I now have an extra attack, in case I hit the same target both times, do I make that target make the saving throw twice (in case he fails the first time...), or perhaps also target two different targets and if I hit, make them both make the saving throw on the same turn?
This would seem a lot better to me, because in comparison, once the enemies trapped in the 20 ft of Entangle save themselves, they will simply leave and not return most of the time. But with Ensnaring strike they could be forced to make the Save throw over and over no matter where they are standing. This seems much better to me, but the other forums mostly say the opposite. So I`m not really sure if I`m getting this right...
One more side note, might also be important = I am considering multiclassing after this level, (or perhaps after level 9 because I`d take Conjure Animals) to maybe something like Rogue/Cleric or perhaps Fighter. Seems Ranger does not really get a lot more after these levels compared to other classes.
I`m adding a poll here, I would highly appreciate your advice, ANY opinions are very welcome!
Thank you in advance.
It says the next hit, so if your first attack hits, that is when the target makes the save or be restrained. Your second attack doesn’t matter as the first one uses the spell. It would say something like “each time you hit a creature” if it was meant to be used more than once.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
So 1d6 damage isn’t much, but if you can keep the creature restrained it helps your party get advantage. And since it is single target it avoids friendly fire.
entangle can have friendly fire and only restrains when you cast it, so if an enemy moves through the area after it was cast they don’t have to make any saves. But it is difficult terrain so it is good for control.
I say, if your party already has some aoe control spells and you tend to fire from range while others move in for melee then go for Ensnaring Strike.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
I would go with entangle because it is a really good battle opener.
As for Ensnaring Strike it only works on your next hit. So if you have Extra Attack and hit with both attacks it procs on the first hit but not the second. The upside is if your attacks miss you can try again with future attacks as long as you maintain concentration on the spell and it hasn't expired. Once you proc it the target is restrained for the remaining duration as long as you maintain concentration and they fail their save.
So for Ensnaring Strike it affects only one target, requires you to hit, requires the target to fail there save, and only takes a bonus action. Entangle takes an action but can hit multiple enemies, and just requires a failed save. Also Entangle doesn't allow allies of the target to try and free it.
Entangle does have a lot of overlap with Web but Entangle only restrains creatures caught in the initial AoE. So after Entangle is cast it is safe for melee character to go in and attack the enemies caught by it.
Either way restrained is a pretty nasty condition and both are useful spells. Given your party make up Ensnaring Strike may be the better option but I really like Entangle. One perk of Ensnaring Strike with a bow is forcing flying creatures without hover to plummet out of the sky.
Ensnaring Strike is not a good spell. It is incredibly unreliable as you have to hit with an attack roll and then have the enemy fail a saving throw. Strength is a very common save for enemies to be adept at passing, and anything large or larger has advantage. And nothing happens if they pass. It's just a wasted spell slot and bonus action. There is so much working against you for a single target effect. And while a bonus action casting might be beneficial for some, it's actually quite awkward for a beast master, as one of their main strengths is always having a weaponized bonus action thanks to their beast companion.
Entangle on the other hand is an S tier 1st level spell. Being able to effect multiple targets, shape the battlefield and have a useful effect even if the enemy makes their save are all hallmarks of what to look for in really good control spells. And as an action cast, it actually works better with the subclass.
With entangle you can engage the entire battlefield of an encounter by yourself on turn 1. Entangle some enemies here, send the beast companion there, and put yourself in a useful spot somewhere else. It really isn't close what the better option is.
Also, I wouldn't worry about overlap with other control effects from the party. In fact, being able to team up and cover large swaths of the battlefield can be very potent. I would say ensnaring strike actually has less synergy with web users than entangle does.
So, here's the problems with Ensnaring Strike, as some people have already pointed out.
For one, it's a Bonus Action to cast, which competes with your Primal Companion... if you really just want to keep an enemy held in place, you could send your Primal Companion to grapple them without spending any additional resources.
For another, it takes your concentration which, yeah, Entangle does too, but Ensnaring Strike takes up your Concentration whether or not it succeeds. It's possible to cast Ensnaring Strike, miss both your attacks, then you're basically concentrating on it for a round while no effects are taking place. Meanwhile, if you cast Entangle and the target you're trying to capture succeeds their saving throw, they're still surrounded with difficult terrain, giving you some battlefield control.
The main benefit of Ensnaring Strike is that it allows you to still deal damage at the cost of drastically reducing the AOE. It works better as a boost to your attack than as a spell unto itself... but like I said, if your priority is just dealing damage, you're losing your Bonus Action to command your Primal Companion. I think for a different Ranger Subclass you would get more use out of Ensnaring Strike, but if you're going to toss out any BA spells, you have to make sure that it's much more useful than what you could accomplish with your companion.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
Optimizing and "picking the right spell" is wonderful on paper, but as you have already mentioned, with a wizard in the party there is a great chance of redundancies with what entangle is designed to do. I have seen some others here mention S tier, being a great opener, and other things about how entangle is so good, and it is. Others still have said ensnaring strike is bad because you have to hit and they get a saving throw. Please keep in mind that a ranger is not a wizard, and that is a different kit of focus, abilities, and party role. Having a wizard in the party is a big deal for this decision as not having one in the party would make this an easy answer, entangle all the way.
You seem worried about "loosing you bonus action". Why? As a ranger, OG or Tasha's, this will happen all of the time. In the same way a full caster is torn between what to use their action and concentration on, rangers have the same for their bonus action. What are you "loosing" for your bonus action for one turn with ensnaring strike? The beats of the land attack? So, what then? Is that 1d8 + 2 + 3? What do you loose as a ranger with extra attack NOT shooting your bow? More than that, I'll bet. Rangers are pin point tacticians and strikers. Rangers should generally not be using their spell slot resource for battlefield control openers unless the party has zero other way of making that happen. As an archer ranger you should be taking care of very precise tactical necessities. Ensnaring strike is not a every battle, battle opener spell. It is a spell that you can shoot when the battle is well under way to swing the odds in your party's favor in a clutch moment.
Everything depends on the individual situation of the party + enemies + battlefield + win condition, but generally speaking, taking a party striker (ranger with a longbow and weaponized bonus action) and putting them in a controller role is likely not good party optimization. Let your wizard do their thing. They have more spell slots, more spells, more variety, and less ability to deal great damage with zero resource expenditure. If your role is the party's backup character, then that is a fun role too, so do what you think will be fun.
Another thing that I see is you talking about multiclassing out of ranger. I am, as several of these others here will attest to, a ranger fan-boy, so I love high level ranger play. I do know that if you want to continue to focus on single target damage with a bow for a ranger than that starts to get tough after level 5-8, and a rogue or fighter multiclass is in your future. Think about this. If you are wanting to focus on single target longbow striker damage, then spells that deal zero damage and use your action are NOT your cup of tea. Spike growth, entangle, cure woulds, while all great spells, are not good for a striker build. They are good for a more diverse ranger build however. Just as folks that have really doubled down on shooting things with a bow for their build bemoan taking conjure animals in later levels, diversifying your spell selection while wanting to fill a role that is hyper focused is tough for anyone, let alone a non full spellcaster.
Ensnaring strike allows you to fire at a single enemy without effecting your allies. It is meant for mid battle tactics, not battle opener tactics. You get two chances to hit your target with extra attack, not two targets to be effective. Yes they get a strength save and large creatures have advantage, but you get to pick you target, not the other way around, so choose wisely. This can be upcast. Is it more damage than hunter's mark or something else? No. But it is damage on top of a debilitating condition for your enemy that is so good when you have allies that can put the hurt down on them.
I mean that's all well and good Frank, but Rangers have painfully few spells known. Fitting both in your arsenal comes at a really big cost, one that I don't think Ensnaring Strike merits. I've had it auto-prepped for 8 levels now with my ancients paladin (who often doesn't use his BA) and I'm confident when I say it's just a bad spell.
I was looking into it a little more, and I realized that Entangle was added to the Ranger spell-list with Tasha's. I think that explains a bit why there's this disparity between the two spells that otherwise seem so similar. Ensnaring Strike was pretty clearly made as the "Ranger Version" of Entangle... something that accomplishes a similar effect, but is designed to pair with Ranger sensibilities (focuses more on additional damage, involves firing an arrow). However, the benefits of the spell are largely outweighed by the greater AOE of Entangle, and the fact that it still provides benefits even if the intended target succeeds on their Saving Throw.
I do agree that there are some situations where Ensnaring Strike is potentially more useful... if a creature is surrounded by allies it's better to use this spell, or if a creature is outside of the range of entangle but within the range of your Longbow it might be the only way you're stopping someone from escaping. But I think that, more often than not, Entangle is going to have more benefits in more fights.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
It's not the best ranger spell, but given the wizard in his party I would go so far as to suggest taking neither entangle or ensnaring strike. Side by side, in a white room, entangle beats ensnaring strike. But for a ranger in an active campaign I bet we'll all find down the road that entangle for rangers is, at least, not as great as people seem to think it is. Everything about it is odd to me. It doesn't mesh well with a ranger's kit, with using an action, not dealing damage, and requiring saving throws. Entangle, and spells like it like the aforementioned web, are available to full casters that are likely building their spell save DC and leaning entirely on spells for their contributions to combat, unlike a martial class. I think entangle is a nice option to have for a ranger, but it definitely isn't a first or even second round pick for them. I mean, why isn't this character looking at pass without trace, absorb elements, healing spirit, aid, or goodberry? With even only one full caster ally in the party, a ranger is contributing more by filling a role that isn't filled by a wizard or other ally.
Also, if rangers have "...painfully few spells known..." then that is even more of a reason not to be picking spells redundant to the party. Optimize the party, not the character.
I think side by side, spell next to spell, saying "...more often than not, Entangle is going to have more benefits in more fights..." is correct. But I don't think that is true for a ranger. And I for sure don't think that is true for a ranger in a party with a wizard or druid.
Have you seriously never seen two characters combine efforts to lock down an entire battlefield with CC? The idea that they should take neither is pretty ill-informed I would say.
I agree that as a ranger your better off picking spells that don't rely on your spellcasting attribute. Pass without Trace is an amazing spell that works the same regardless of what your spellcasting attribute is. Zephyr Strike is an excellent escape tool as a ranged ranger as a first level spell and Pass without Trace or Silence are great 2nd level options.
LOL!! Ok ok. Don't come at me so hard.
If that is what this person wants to do with their "...painfully few spells known...", then it is a great choice. But if they want to fill a role instead of double down on one, then that is a great choice too.
I'm so sorry our vision of what is "good" and "bad" don't align, HeironymusZot.
Thanks a lot for your input guys! I see it is not such a straight forward pick indeed - based on mixed reactions.
A side note - we actually have a big party (Wiz, Ranger, Bard, Rogue, Warrior and Paladin). Our paladin is our main healer, wiz (control and damage), bard (boosting and debuffing & some control spells). I`m mostly the support char - shooting from distance and using my beast to slow down and attack one enemy at time + occasional heal...
Yes, I was thinking about these as well! Still not a 100 % decided if I shouldn`t go perhaps for heals instead...
PwT - Seems great for some campaigns, but our party is a really loud one... We invite trouble rather then sneak around if you know what I mean :D
AE - In first 5 LVLs we only encountered someone with those types of dmg 2 or 3 times... I`m looking for something usable most of the time
Aid - Our Bard has a very similar spell adding temporary HP.
Healing spirit/Goodberry - Yes to these two! They are my biggest rivals to 2nd lvl Spike Growth and 1st Entangle/ES...
All things considered perhaps this could provide our team with more depth, since there is 6 of us, and some aditional heal would be better then crowd control spells like Spike Growth, Entangle etc. Afterall our wizard had Web for 2 levels now and only uses it once since our DM really thinks twice before putting our enemies next to each other. On the other hand sometimes even slowing down one enemy is a strong enough action.
You summarized it well! I would add that it`s not always that entangle actually can effect more then one or two enemies at a time, especially when our DM will know that two in our party will have such a spell, he will try to avoid that even more. And once they do free themselves the spell is simply useless for the rest of the minute. However ensnaring strike, I can force a creature (that I chose!) to make the save even in round 2, 3, 4 (or at least I presume the spell works in every round when I hit while active...) Most of the times our fights take at least 4 rounds, and as I said I have +10 to hit!
Although I`m not really closer to picking the spell, I am very thankful for everyone's input!
Here is a list of 1st level ranger spells. https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells?filter-class=0&filter-class=5&filter-search=&filter-level=1&filter-verbal=&filter-somatic=&filter-material=&filter-concentration=&filter-ritual=&filter-sub-class=&filter-source=2&filter-source=67&filter-source=27
They already have hunter's mark, cure wounds, spike growth, (I'm assuming with the next two), speak with animals, and best sense.
Absorb elements, ensnaring strike, entangle, fog cloud, goodberry, hail of thorns, and zephyr strike are all great 1st level ranger spells. 3 of these use the ranger's spell save DC. The rest don't. Several are bonus actions. Most use concentration. This player gets to pick one of them, and one of them is almost (but still not as potent) as a spell the wizard in the party already has access to.
Damn I think I didn`t understand Ensnaring Strike properly. I was assuming that after it hits the first time you can then use it on the next rounds as well. But I read some more about this, and it actually ends after the first time you hit.
Is that correct?
If so, then Entangle is surely the better spell. I thought you get to use Ensnaring strike each round until the spell ends (even after you hit), that would be too good...
But Frank you actually had a great point, that made me think - "optimize the party rather than the character".
Considering our wide party, it might be better to go for Goodberry instead of Entangle, and Healing spirit instead of Spike growth. Damn, even more to think about :D
Ensnaring strike "works" the first time you hit a target with a weapon attack. Hopefully they fail their saving throw. If they do fail their saving throw then you can continue concentrating on the spell for a minute (using zero additional action or bonus action). For the entirety of 1 minute that the target doesn't save and you continue to concentrate on the spell, the target is restrained and takes damage at the start of each of their turns.
It is tricky to get to stick, as others have said. But when you do get it to stick it's harder to break out of because it's a straight strength CHECK. You can use it on the target of your choice in the middle of a combat with your fellow rogue, paladin, and warrior, all without effecting them in the slightest aside from possibly giving them advantage to hit one of their targets.
Also remember that any time you don't use you bonus action to command your beast of the land to attack, you still have the options to either move it into a tactical position, to help the rogue get sneak attack, setup for a possible opportunity attack on an enemy, or provide flanking (if you are using that optional rule from the dungeon master's guide), or you can give up one of your attacks from extra attack to let the beast of the land attack anyway. A longbow without hunter's mark is doing 8.5 (1d8 + 4) while your beast of the land is doing 9.5 (1d8 + 2 + 3) damage, with a slightly less chance to hit. More damage if the beast charges.
Instead of thinking of all of this as bonus action clog, think of it all as options at your disposal.