Note I used the feat thing specifically on fighter because fighters get an extra ASI so they might as well. The other factor is I was partially assuming everyone was talking about new beast master and not old. I had not looked into old and since the new one largely gives a use for your bonus action the only feat that is usually relevant for damage for new beast master ranger would be sharp shooter because they are using their bonus action to keep up with the pet.
I think my point is, unless you are playing ranged ranger or gloomstalker (which is typically ranged ranger) you are basically better off playing anything else, and the only reason ranged ranger keeps up is crossbow expert and Sharpshooter which makes me sad because classes shouldnt have to rely on feats to be good (but that is a martial issue since melee martials are also relying on feats to be good).
The fighter also really likes his feats. and if the ranger even has 3/4{which is untrue but lets use that} the combat potential of one of these other classes. They still have all the cool non-combat options that make adventuring easier.
Tasha's beastmaster VS PHB is a great example of how somethings sound better but are really just different paths. I find using tasha's means your bonus action is tied up too often to get good use out of both spells and the pet on the regular. But the action economy "appears better" so people said it was great without any deep dive into how it actually played out.
the same is with the hunter. If you look at how to make it work you will have fun options and a unique party role other class/subclasses can't do. but those other classes still have their own unique ways to adventure. the game isn't meant to be unwinnable for any class.
I will say beast master, both tasha's and non, was a lot better than I thought it would be. Tasha's is solid if you go full wisdom and druidic fighter which is definitely an option I could do.
The character idea was a Martial melee fighter with good wisdom so that I could have good survival, perception and insight skills I KNOW I can do it with fighter, since fighter is very much SAD so I can always have a mental stat like wisdom be a good amount and put feats in things like skill expert and prodigy as a human to get the skills, but I wanted to try one of the martial classes that were more "dedicated" to being wisdom martials. Most of my games go until around level 11to 13. The first class I thought might be fun was monk. So I got to try build that, thoughts were drunken master, or open hand. Problem was, their damage fell off hard and become largely ineffective at around level 11. This build idea I may be able to salvage by taking monk to level 7 or so and then going fighter for 4 levels to get action surge and battle master maneuvers in an attempt to keep up at the higher levels, fighting style probably great weapon since spear and staffs are both versatile weapons and so is a longsword which I can use with dedicated weapon.
But I wanted to see if I couldn't do a pure class, and since Monk didn't work I thought. Hey why not the other Wisdom based martial class the ranger. Well didn't want to do gloomstalker because I am well over and done with seeing that class every time I see a ranger. It is almost always a 3 level dip to gloomstalker, so didn't want to do that. I had heard both drake and beastmaster were good, but initially didn't really pay them any attention because companion idea wasn't what I was originally going for. So I decided ok let's see, Horizon walker? no it takes a bonus action to do its thing and at 11 it needs a very specific scenario to do the thing the fighter does for free which is attack 3 times. So its bonus action is just worse than a feat and its 11 means it can, on occasion, keep up, but is also spreading the damage around instead of just dropping the one guy. Ok so Monster slayer, same problem. Swarm keeper, ok the bonus action problem isn't there, but the damage is still super low, and the battlefield control I can match with battlemaster so this didn't really help. Same with Fey wanderer, Summon fey is cool, 6 levels earlier when the druid or the warlock got it, at least it is free.
But I will admit at least beast master does seem to keep up if I wanted to go all druidic warrior if using tasha's or basically make the beast the primary side of things if I wanted to use the classic version.
Dracon Warden surprisingly doesn't keep up as well as I thought it would. The 1d6 from the pet is no action from you, cool. The bonus action attack though scales very poorly as by the time you hit 11 3+PB is a 55% chance to hit. And 2d6+PB is only about 11 damage on average with that bonus action if it hits. So I thought, lets check hunter. Ok 1d8, but not using my bonus action so ok still not great as established previously, but something. Giant, well that uses my reaction now, horde breaker, very specific scenario that may or may not ever come up. Ok well how does it scale to 11, AoE attack, which lead to this thread finding out, that much like horde breaker, super situational. Which lead to the conclusion, well if monster slayer, swarm keeper, fey wanderer, hunter and drakewarden all have the same level 11 effectiveness drop off, and gloomstalker is like the only one I see anyone talk about..... wow ranger just falls off at 11 just like the poor monk.
Of course I could always just do fighter. Start with +3 wisdom and do, runic knight, battlemaster, or samurai with GWM instead of Polearm and be just as good at the skills I wanted, especially if I pick V. human and skill expert start with the outlander background and now I forage and navigate wilderness fine, but the idea that fighter would somehow make the better wisdom based martial doesn't sit right with me.
In general I feel Ranger, Monk, Rogue and Barbarian (do not know about artificer), all fall off at the 11 to 14 tier of play at the very least by comparison to the only other 2 martial classes Fighter and Paladin. Paladin almost doesn't care about its subclass it is just "i'm a paladin doing paladin things." Same with fighter. It just feels bad.
At 11th rangers start getting a cool subclass boon that equates to extra damage or a powerful unique feature.
the levels onward 12-14 Are unique because as a ranger You now have to use more Resources to stay near the top which is fine because no one class should sit high at all tiers of play. but being able to access ranger 3rd level spells is great for any half-caster as a melee ranger remember You now can move through non-magic difficult terrain and plants better than some others so mobile striking with Ashardalon’s Stride or running in with a horde of Conjure Animals is great fun and as long as you keep concentration you are doing both normal damage{no HM of course} + those spells. plant growth also can just be so fun to find places to use.{there is a very slight chance you can get a dm to rule the "normal plants" as non-magical} You could also go the route of wind wall and create an enemy line where they have to approach to attack the party{check with your dm about ordinary most will include spell projectiles that say "bolt" and such}.
At 11th rangers start getting a cool subclass boon that equates to extra damage or a powerful unique feature.
the levels onward 12-14 Are unique because as a ranger You now have to use more Resources to stay near the top which is fine because no one class should sit high at all tiers of play. but being able to access ranger 3rd level spells is great for any half-caster as a melee ranger remember You now can move through non-magic difficult terrain and plants better than some others so mobile striking with Ashardalon’s Stride or running in with a horde of Conjure Animals is great fun and as long as you keep concentration you are doing both normal damage{no HM of course} + those spells. plant growth also can just be so fun to find places to use.{there is a very slight chance you can get a dm to rule the "normal plants" as non-magical} You could also go the route of wind wall and create an enemy line where they have to approach to attack the party{check with your dm about ordinary most will include spell projectiles that say "bolt" and such}.
The subclass boons are what I am talking about being weak. Other than beast master and drake warden.
Hunter gets a super small AOE that is much too situational to be reliable damage boost, Fey wanderer has its 1d4 once per round become a 1d6 (average 1 damage increase) and gets a meh spell in summon fey, Horizon walkers bonus action ability goes to 2d8 from 1d8, this is a damage boost of average of 4.5, and it still uses your bonus action and bonus action PAM is still more damage if you have dueling fighting style, and it gets a third attack, as long as there are at least 3 targets and you spread that damage out.... fighters get 3 attacks period, no caveats. Monster slayers level 11 is basically crappy version of counterspell, finally swarm keeper, damage goes from d6 to d8, again 1 damage boost on average. So, all-in-all, no rangers subclass feature at 11 does not really equate to more damage or a cool feature, with very few notable exceptions in beast master. Drake warden just gets the breath weapon, so you know, fireball, but on a martial (that is cool) and 6 levels late (that's not cool).
Fighter gets a whole extra attack, even if only having 1 handed weapon that is an average of 11.5 damage increase assuming you hit 1 more time than you did before with this one extra attack. Paladin gets an extra 1d8 on all of its attacks, polearm master with a spear means this is a total of 13.5 damage increase (assuming all attacks hit, so likely a little less). These are damage boosts, Ranger's subclass "damage boosts" are a joke.
Though land stride at 8 + 3rd level spells at 9 are cool. Especially with the plant growth (plant growth I argue pretty heavily is not magical, the effect is instantaneous and has no duration, the plants grow magically, but once grown they are just plants.)
Edit: I mean if you know a way to make a non-gloomstalker ranger keep up with a level 11 fighter in melee. I would love to see it. I am always interested in builds I am not seeing.
Why do you even need to keep up with a Fighter in melee in the first place though? Fighting is literally all they can do so it's fine if they are ahead in that area. Meanwhile Rangers have so much more utility in their baseclass as well as their subclasses. The game is not about getting first place in some damage recap after every fight or something lol
Another thing I noticed is that you keep calling the Ranger a WIS based martial. That's not quite correct. They are a WIS based half-caster. Their martial part is still mostly DEX based (STR is possible but just means you're making things even harder for yourself). The caster part however isn't there to balance out the martial part damage-wise. It does that too to some degree but it's also there to give you more tools for your adventuring day.
Also you keep talking about subclass features as if that's all there is to the Ranger. At level 11 they also get an additional 3rd level spell slot. That could be an additional 8 Velociraptors with Conjure Animals (one of the most broken things in the game in case you weren't aware), 16 Attacks at advantage that each deal 5/4 damage. Definitely more than the Fighter gets.
If you are just interested in hitting stuff with your large stick, then better stick (pun intended) with the Fighter. Ranger is not the class for you. Come back when you're tired of just hitting stuff and are more interested in other aspects of the game. Then you might find out why people actually like playing Ranger too.
The thing is, AOE spells are just better at AOE damage. I think if I want to do AOE damage as a Ranger I would just go Draken warden or something along those lines to get myself a nice breath weapon that deals significantly more than 1 attack worth of damage. It, to me just emphasizes how certain classes just fall off at level 11. I think for the most part that I would just go horizon walker over hunter if I wanted "melee ranger" because the teleports make the situations where the effects more reliable. It is just unfortunate that paladin's can get an extra d8 on all attacks and, for the most part ranger is begging for 1d8 of extra damage unless you are in hyper specific scenarios. Being able to do some AoE is good, but needing that many targets within 5 feet of you, just is not realistic, like how are you getting 4 people near you? I am assuming you are literally surrounded at that point. It does make sense why hunter probably goes ranged more often than melee. 10 foot radius that you do not have to be in the middle of is a much better chance for you to have enough people in it and positioning is much less troublesome.
You're conflating Ranger and Hunter, which is interesting considering that you namechecked Drake Warden and Horizon Walker as being able to keep up with other classes.
If you're disappointed by how the Hunter plays, that's your prerogative. But don't make sweeping statements about the Ranger as a whole just because you don't like the Hunter's 11th-level ability.
When it comes to Hunters specifically, and melee Hunters at that, I will say that they get their choice of defensive options that help protect them from attacks (Escape the Horde, Multiattack Defense.) So they're really good at going in, baiting enemies to surround them, nailing a bunch of attacks, and then getting out if that is their wont. If those abilities are not enough for you, there's always the Mobile feat. I will say that something Hunters in general lack is the ability to force enemies to attack/surround them -a true Defender mechanic a la 4e. But that's not really a role 5e cares to develop so...oh well.
That said, Rangers in general can be built well as tanks by giving them access to the trifecta of defensive spells: Absorb Elements (already on their spell list), Silvery Barbs (via Fey Touched), and Shield (via Magic/Strixhaven Initiate.) The latter can be obtained by a Background if your DM allows Strixhaven content, thus not getting in the way of progression. So yeah. Hunters can be easily built in such a way that they don't care for getting surrounded and actually enjoy the enemy clustering around them.
*Also, Nature's Veil let's them become invisible for a round, which makes them even harder to hit. Defensively, they're fine
I want to note that I am not conflating hunter with ranger. I was checking if hunter had some secret tech that was good that meant that there was a good subclass other than gloomstalker. Horizon walker can SOMETIMES keep up with fighter or Paladin but for the most part no, you need to utilize the bonus action at 11 to get 2d8 while they can use Polearm master and get their extra damage. You need 3 targets with horizon walker to hit 3 times and still get that 2d8 while the fighter can just hit 3 times and still have a bonus action attack that can do about the same if not more damage than the 2d8 without using resources. The breath weapon is basically a fireball, which the dragon ranger got at level 11, and the spell casters got that ability 6 levels earlier. Monk has the same issue, and so does Barbarian. Spell casters auto scale and get 6th level spells, fighters get 3 attacks, warlocks get 3 beams, paladins get a d8 to all attacks. Rogues get 1 extra d6, Rangers get 1 extra d8 from most of their subclasses, Monks get their bonus action attacks dealing an average of 1 more per hit, and barbarians get tankier. It just seems in general these are the classes that fall off at 11. Unless you are playing the one subclass that actually makes them super good.
Edit: I mean if you know a way to make a non-gloomstalker ranger keep up with a level 11 fighter in melee. I would love to see it. I am always interested in builds I am not seeing.
Ah. So this post was all just a bad-faith (and half-assed) attempt at a "gotcha" moment to try to prove a point about Rangers being bad. Got it
It sounds like you should just play a fighter that also focuses on wisdom and skills. Fighters are literally designed to deal damage. I think you also find that all of the other classes that feature dexterity don’t “do as much damage“ as those that feature strength. Dexterity is a much more powerful stat.
Personally, I think you are over valuing pure damage output a little. You also seem to be trying to take a mold that works for fighter and apply it successfully to something else, and it’s not working. Let’s try this mold for rogue or cleric or wizard. It won’t work. Why? Because they are literally built differently.
I love that you think feats shouldn’t be the end all be all. I agree. Feats help martials deal damage. Sure. Feats have a cost though, both by not getting an ASI and not picking another feat.
Strength fighters and paladins are going to be tough to beat for single target, single turn, melee damage. They’re just built that way. But! They have almost zero tools to deal with Range or multiple enemies. Not to mention everything other than just dealing damage.
A fighter doing the spear/shield/PAM thing at level 11 is doing 41. A warlock is 40.5. A gloomstalker (4-round combat) is 34.25. A hunter is 30.5, it’s doing 35 with colossus slayer, 33.13 with horde breaker only happening once (the difference here is the hunter has the potential to do more, situationally). A beast master with a wolf and not using PAM (just rapier, so open bonus action and a feat or ASI for something else) is doing 33.5. A barbarian with an axe is 29 plus more critical. A rogue with two short swords is 33. A battle smith is 31.5 plus their 2d6 thing. A monk is doing 38, and more if they have the setup, like a fireball.
Its all relative. Damage is great and all. Essential even. But how much damage mixed with what else a PC can do is more important for me.
It's also worth noting that while the Ranger T3 attacks are definitely conditional, they also do come with riders.
Beast Masters with wolves get pack tactics and the chance to knock a target prone. Ditto beast of the land. The Horizon Walker is doing exactly the same as a Paladin that isn't smiting...but they also get free teleportation riders. Slayer's Counter automatically saves for the effect that procced it. So on and so forth.
A Fighter gets a consistent third attack and...that's it. Maybe more damage if the Ranger doesn't meet the requirements for their third attack, but they get nothing else to control the flow of battle. And I'm not even getting into the Ranger's spellcasting that improves their dpr far beyond anything a Fighter can possibly dream of (the Horizon Walker's Haste; Conjure Animals.)
It sounds like you should just play a fighter that also focuses on wisdom and skills. Fighters are literally designed to deal damage. I think you also find that all of the other classes that feature dexterity don’t “do as much damage“ as those that feature strength. Dexterity is a much more powerful stat.
Personally, I think you are over valuing pure damage output a little. You also seem to be trying to take a mold that works for fighter and apply it successfully to something else, and it’s not working. Let’s try this mold for rogue or cleric or wizard. It won’t work. Why? Because they are literally built differently.
I love that you think feats shouldn’t be the end all be all. I agree. Feats help martials deal damage. Sure. Feats have a cost though, both by not getting an ASI and not picking another feat.
Strength fighters and paladins are going to be tough to beat for single target, single turn, melee damage. They’re just built that way. But! They have almost zero tools to deal with Range or multiple enemies. Not to mention everything other than just dealing damage.
A fighter doing the spear/shield/PAM thing at level 11 is doing 41. A warlock is 40.5. A gloomstalker (4-round combat) is 34.25. A hunter is 30.5, it’s doing 35 with colossus slayer, 33.13 with horde breaker only happening once (the difference here is the hunter has the potential to do more, situationally). A beast master with a wolf and not using PAM (just rapier, so open bonus action and a feat or ASI for something else) is doing 33.5. A barbarian with an axe is 29 plus more critical. A rogue with two short swords is 33. A battle smith is 31.5 plus their 2d6 thing. A monk is doing 38, and more if they have the setup, like a fireball.
Its all relative. Damage is great and all. Essential even. But how much damage mixed with what else a PC can do is more important for me.
That's what the skills are for. The only thing I couldn't do with the fighter that I could do with the ranger besides damage is healing. Skills checks kind of handle the rest and ranger doesn't get enough extra here to justify. Also I feel like you assumed fighter couldnt go dex or that ranger couldnt go strength. They both can do both, the fighter is just more effective at both. Ranger is slightly more maneuverable, same with monk. Rogue's I also said fall behind, but at least they are still better at skills and more maneuverable thanks to cunning action. Clerics are full casters, full casters get crazy stuff they can do, and I would never presume to compare a martial to a full caster because it simply is not fair to the martial. Also ya, I saw the Gift of Nature spell. That once per long rest spell (at 13) would help quite a bit (and having 3, 3rd level spells really helps out as well when keeping up with martials), but it is really 15 where most rangers catch up. That final feature is usually pretty awesome for them. I may try to multi-class after 9 for a 2 level dip in something, maybe fighter, and then go back to ranger and take it to 15 so that the level 17 can be another big power spike. I was just noticing and paying lip to points where fall off happened. (also if I only cared about damage I would be saying casters fall off at 11, but i am not because 6th level spells are bonkers).
I feel like everyone here assumes fighters just hits stuff. What I mean by "wisdom based martial class" is a class that utilizes martial skills that can also benefit from having good wisdom so they can have wisdom based skills. Honestly if you guys think fighters "just hit things" I invite you to build more fighters, more specifically, build more interesting fighters I was talking about ranger sublcasses because they don't get anything except a subclass feature at 11, I wasn't talking about fighter subclasses, because it didn't need one to stay relevant into that next tier of play. Conjure animals (as my GM likes to put it) he gets to pick the animals, and sometimes they are useful, sometimes less so. Still, I feel I got all the info I needed to me, monks, rangers, rogues and Barbarians all don't really stack up to paladin's, pure casters and fighters in the 11-14 or 15 mark all that well. If I want to play a nature based class, probably going to stick with druid. If I want to play a class with a companion Ranger is definite going to be my go to, both the drake and beast are super cool and well balanced. If I want to play someone that is good at fighting with, wisdom based skills, or dex based skills or any skills as their secondary thing, Fighter is the go to. If I want to play someone that is just skill monkey without having to go magical, rogue. Unfortunately, no reason to play monk. Barbarian, I could probably make a tank build, but probably multi-class out around level 6 or so.
Edit: I am still very interested in trying a ranger multi-class build that helps it keep up better at 11, and then push ranger further since those 4th and 5th level spells are so juicy.
I feel like everyone here assumes fighters just hits stuff. What I mean by "wisdom based martial class" is a class that utilizes martial skills that can also benefit from having good wisdom so they can have wisdom based skills. Honestly if you guys think fighters "just hit things" I invite you to build more fighters, more specifically, build more interesting fighters I was talking about ranger sublcasses because they don't get anything except a subclass feature at 11, I wasn't talking about fighter subclasses, because it didn't need one to stay relevant into that next tier of play. Conjure animals (as my GM likes to put it) he gets to pick the animals, and sometimes they are useful, sometimes less so. Still, I feel I got all the info I needed to me, monks, rangers, rogues and Barbarians all don't really stack up to paladin's, pure casters and fighters in the 11-14 or 15 mark all that well. If I want to play a nature based class, probably going to stick with druid. If I want to play a class with a companion Ranger is definite going to be my go to, both the drake and beast are super cool and well balanced. If I want to play someone that is good at fighting with, wisdom based skills, or dex based skills or any skills as their secondary thing, Fighter is the go to. If I want to play someone that is just skill monkey without having to go magical, rogue. Unfortunately, no reason to play monk. Barbarian, I could probably make a tank build, but probably multi-class out around level 6 or so.
Edit: I am still very interested in trying a ranger multi-class build that helps it keep up better at 11, and then push ranger further since those 4th and 5th level spells are so juicy.
I have tried to keep Good faith discussion on my part and after your post (#22) I realized What you were after and that some of your preferences were being construed as bad faith when they weren't at all. Phrases like "no reason" certainly don't help your case. {I am constantly reminded of Bill Burs No reason to hit a woman skit} But you have actually been a decent counter discussion participant.
Still it sounds like the "slowing" of damage progress gets under your skin and you are dissatisfied. To that I respond you either are holding the whole game to High optimization standards or are just "trying to have your cake and eat it too"
For conjure animals-Even poor choice animals still do decent in combat.
I actually like many of the fighter subclasses they can do things that no other class can do. Especially the battle master. At the same time there are a lot of un-calculable for ranger that are also getting pushed to the side. Many people treat tasha's exhaustion removal as game breaking. Many people think their skill checks should be able to match Favored terrain But they can't. why Because they are unique and holding a sole adventuring space means there is value because no one else can. like I said every class has dips and the fact that a ranger is still ok at its lowest is amazing fun and a solid choice for any party.
I feel like everyone here assumes fighters just hits stuff. What I mean by "wisdom based martial class" is a class that utilizes martial skills that can also benefit from having good wisdom so they can have wisdom based skills. Honestly if you guys think fighters "just hit things" I invite you to build more fighters, more specifically, build more interesting fighters I was talking about ranger sublcasses because they don't get anything except a subclass feature at 11, I wasn't talking about fighter subclasses, because it didn't need one to stay relevant into that next tier of play. Conjure animals (as my GM likes to put it) he gets to pick the animals, and sometimes they are useful, sometimes less so. Still, I feel I got all the info I needed to me, monks, rangers, rogues and Barbarians all don't really stack up to paladin's, pure casters and fighters in the 11-14 or 15 mark all that well. If I want to play a nature based class, probably going to stick with druid. If I want to play a class with a companion Ranger is definite going to be my go to, both the drake and beast are super cool and well balanced. If I want to play someone that is good at fighting with, wisdom based skills, or dex based skills or any skills as their secondary thing, Fighter is the go to. If I want to play someone that is just skill monkey without having to go magical, rogue. Unfortunately, no reason to play monk. Barbarian, I could probably make a tank build, but probably multi-class out around level 6 or so.
Edit: I am still very interested in trying a ranger multi-class build that helps it keep up better at 11, and then push ranger further since those 4th and 5th level spells are so juicy.
I have tried to keep Good faith discussion on my part and after your post (#22) I realized What you were after and that some of your preferences were being construed as bad faith when they weren't at all. Phrases like "no reason" certainly don't help your case. {I am constantly reminded of Bill Burs No reason to hit a woman skit} But you have actually been a decent counter discussion participant.
Still it sounds like the "slowing" of damage progress gets under your skin and you are dissatisfied. To that I respond you either are holding the whole game to High optimization standards or are just "trying to have your cake and eat it too"
For conjure animals-Even poor choice animals still do decent in combat.
I actually like many of the fighter subclasses they can do things that no other class can do. Especially the battle master. At the same time there are a lot of un-calculable for ranger that are also getting pushed to the side. Many people treat tasha's exhaustion removal as game breaking. Many people think their skill checks should be able to match Favored terrain But they can't. why Because they are unique and holding a sole adventuring space means there is value because no one else can. like I said every class has dips and the fact that a ranger is still ok at its lowest is amazing fun and a solid choice for any party.
Will do. One thing of note, which is both a huge + for classes like ranger and extremely small negative for them as well. Is GM's design encounters around characters. Huge + means if you want areas to shine with niche abilities, talk to dm and you can have some cool stand out moments. These moments cant happen with other party comps. Also always remember this is a team game. Being unable to do something, in my mind, can be a good thing, because that is what team mates are for :). But ya will definitely do.
I feel like everyone here assumes fighters just hits stuff. What I mean by "wisdom based martial class" is a class that utilizes martial skills that can also benefit from having good wisdom so they can have wisdom based skills. Honestly if you guys think fighters "just hit things" I invite you to build more fighters, more specifically, build more interesting fighters I was talking about ranger sublcasses because they don't get anything except a subclass feature at 11, I wasn't talking about fighter subclasses, because it didn't need one to stay relevant into that next tier of play. Conjure animals (as my GM likes to put it) he gets to pick the animals, and sometimes they are useful, sometimes less so. Still, I feel I got all the info I needed to me, monks, rangers, rogues and Barbarians all don't really stack up to paladin's, pure casters and fighters in the 11-14 or 15 mark all that well. If I want to play a nature based class, probably going to stick with druid. If I want to play a class with a companion Ranger is definite going to be my go to, both the drake and beast are super cool and well balanced. If I want to play someone that is good at fighting with, wisdom based skills, or dex based skills or any skills as their secondary thing, Fighter is the go to. If I want to play someone that is just skill monkey without having to go magical, rogue. Unfortunately, no reason to play monk. Barbarian, I could probably make a tank build, but probably multi-class out around level 6 or so.
Edit: I am still very interested in trying a ranger multi-class build that helps it keep up better at 11, and then push ranger further since those 4th and 5th level spells are so juicy.
I have tried to keep Good faith discussion on my part and after your post (#22) I realized What you were after and that some of your preferences were being construed as bad faith when they weren't at all. Phrases like "no reason" certainly don't help your case. {I am constantly reminded of Bill Burs No reason to hit a woman skit} But you have actually been a decent counter discussion participant.
Still it sounds like the "slowing" of damage progress gets under your skin and you are dissatisfied. To that I respond you either are holding the whole game to High optimization standards or are just "trying to have your cake and eat it too"
For conjure animals-Even poor choice animals still do decent in combat.
I actually like many of the fighter subclasses they can do things that no other class can do. Especially the battle master. At the same time there are a lot of un-calculable for ranger that are also getting pushed to the side. Many people treat tasha's exhaustion removal as game breaking. Many people think their skill checks should be able to match Favored terrain But they can't. why Because they are unique and holding a sole adventuring space means there is value because no one else can. like I said every class has dips and the fact that a ranger is still ok at its lowest is amazing fun and a solid choice for any party.
Will do. One thing of note, which is both a huge + for classes like ranger and extremely small negative for them as well. Is GM's design encounters around characters. Huge + means if you want areas to shine with niche abilities, talk to dm and you can have some cool stand out moments. These moments cant happen with other party comps. Also always remember this is a team game. Being unable to do something, in my mind, can be a good thing, because that is what team mates are for :). But ya will definitely do.
I feel like everyone here assumes fighters just hits stuff. What I mean by "wisdom based martial class" is a class that utilizes martial skills that can also benefit from having good wisdom so they can have wisdom based skills. Honestly if you guys think fighters "just hit things" I invite you to build more fighters, more specifically, build more interesting fighters I was talking about ranger sublcasses because they don't get anything except a subclass feature at 11, I wasn't talking about fighter subclasses, because it didn't need one to stay relevant into that next tier of play. Conjure animals (as my GM likes to put it) he gets to pick the animals, and sometimes they are useful, sometimes less so. Still, I feel I got all the info I needed to me, monks, rangers, rogues and Barbarians all don't really stack up to paladin's, pure casters and fighters in the 11-14 or 15 mark all that well. If I want to play a nature based class, probably going to stick with druid. If I want to play a class with a companion Ranger is definite going to be my go to, both the drake and beast are super cool and well balanced. If I want to play someone that is good at fighting with, wisdom based skills, or dex based skills or any skills as their secondary thing, Fighter is the go to. If I want to play someone that is just skill monkey without having to go magical, rogue. Unfortunately, no reason to play monk. Barbarian, I could probably make a tank build, but probably multi-class out around level 6 or so.
Edit: I am still very interested in trying a ranger multi-class build that helps it keep up better at 11, and then push ranger further since those 4th and 5th level spells are so juicy.
There's so many things wrong in this post and the one before this one, I don't even know where to begin and honestly I don't get the feeling it's worth the effort either. You seem to be pretty set with your opinions. All I'm going to say is that Rangers are still good at fighting and that they can do more than just healing that doesn't get covered by skill checks. They just aren't the best at fighting and that's okay. There can always be only one that is the best at something and 5e is a very forgiving system anyway.
You (OP) seem to really value a set amount of damage, in a certain way, against a certain type of enemy. That’s unfortunate because your list of barbarians, rogues, monks, and rangers are, not only more fun to play, but are much more useful to a party than a melee martial “stick”.
I feel like everyone here assumes fighters just hits stuff. What I mean by "wisdom based martial class" is a class that utilizes martial skills that can also benefit from having good wisdom so they can have wisdom based skills. Honestly if you guys think fighters "just hit things" I invite you to build more fighters, more specifically, build more interesting fighters I was talking about ranger sublcasses because they don't get anything except a subclass feature at 11, I wasn't talking about fighter subclasses, because it didn't need one to stay relevant into that next tier of play. Conjure animals (as my GM likes to put it) he gets to pick the animals, and sometimes they are useful, sometimes less so. Still, I feel I got all the info I needed to me, monks, rangers, rogues and Barbarians all don't really stack up to paladin's, pure casters and fighters in the 11-14 or 15 mark all that well. If I want to play a nature based class, probably going to stick with druid. If I want to play a class with a companion Ranger is definite going to be my go to, both the drake and beast are super cool and well balanced. If I want to play someone that is good at fighting with, wisdom based skills, or dex based skills or any skills as their secondary thing, Fighter is the go to. If I want to play someone that is just skill monkey without having to go magical, rogue. Unfortunately, no reason to play monk. Barbarian, I could probably make a tank build, but probably multi-class out around level 6 or so.
Edit: I am still very interested in trying a ranger multi-class build that helps it keep up better at 11, and then push ranger further since those 4th and 5th level spells are so juicy.
I have tried to keep Good faith discussion on my part and after your post (#22) I realized What you were after and that some of your preferences were being construed as bad faith when they weren't at all. Phrases like "no reason" certainly don't help your case. {I am constantly reminded of Bill Burs No reason to hit a woman skit} But you have actually been a decent counter discussion participant.
Still it sounds like the "slowing" of damage progress gets under your skin and you are dissatisfied. To that I respond you either are holding the whole game to High optimization standards or are just "trying to have your cake and eat it too"
For conjure animals-Even poor choice animals still do decent in combat.
I actually like many of the fighter subclasses they can do things that no other class can do. Especially the battle master. At the same time there are a lot of un-calculable for ranger that are also getting pushed to the side. Many people treat tasha's exhaustion removal as game breaking. Many people think their skill checks should be able to match Favored terrain But they can't. why Because they are unique and holding a sole adventuring space means there is value because no one else can. like I said every class has dips and the fact that a ranger is still ok at its lowest is amazing fun and a solid choice for any party.
Will do. One thing of note, which is both a huge + for classes like ranger and extremely small negative for them as well. Is GM's design encounters around characters. Huge + means if you want areas to shine with niche abilities, talk to dm and you can have some cool stand out moments. These moments cant happen with other party comps. Also always remember this is a team game. Being unable to do something, in my mind, can be a good thing, because that is what team mates are for :). But ya will definitely do.
I promise you a dm can make any class shine or falter by just choosing specific encounters or enemies. This is a universal. some dms tend to anti-favor ranger features but there are still ways to keep up.
I find most uses of the community use of "situational" lack a well developed frequency analysis.
You (OP) seem to really value a set amount of damage, in a certain way, against a certain type of enemy. That’s unfortunate because your list of barbarians, rogues, monks, and rangers are, not only more fun to play, but are much more useful to a party than a melee martial “stick”.
Every character is more than a melee martial stick. That is not unique to any of those classes.
You (OP) seem to really value a set amount of damage, in a certain way, against a certain type of enemy. That’s unfortunate because your list of barbarians, rogues, monks, and rangers are, not only more fun to play, but are much more useful to a party than a melee martial “stick”.
Every character is more than a melee martial stick. That is not unique to any of those classes.
What I’m saying, and I suspect you know this already, is your value system, which you are of course entitled to, is biased towards a very specific function. And with that you have little value in other functions.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The fighter also really likes his feats. and if the ranger even has 3/4{which is untrue but lets use that} the combat potential of one of these other classes. They still have all the cool non-combat options that make adventuring easier.
Tasha's beastmaster VS PHB is a great example of how somethings sound better but are really just different paths. I find using tasha's means your bonus action is tied up too often to get good use out of both spells and the pet on the regular. But the action economy "appears better" so people said it was great without any deep dive into how it actually played out.
the same is with the hunter. If you look at how to make it work you will have fun options and a unique party role other class/subclasses can't do. but those other classes still have their own unique ways to adventure. the game isn't meant to be unwinnable for any class.
I will say beast master, both tasha's and non, was a lot better than I thought it would be. Tasha's is solid if you go full wisdom and druidic fighter which is definitely an option I could do.
The character idea was a Martial melee fighter with good wisdom so that I could have good survival, perception and insight skills I KNOW I can do it with fighter, since fighter is very much SAD so I can always have a mental stat like wisdom be a good amount and put feats in things like skill expert and prodigy as a human to get the skills, but I wanted to try one of the martial classes that were more "dedicated" to being wisdom martials. Most of my games go until around level 11to 13. The first class I thought might be fun was monk. So I got to try build that, thoughts were drunken master, or open hand. Problem was, their damage fell off hard and become largely ineffective at around level 11. This build idea I may be able to salvage by taking monk to level 7 or so and then going fighter for 4 levels to get action surge and battle master maneuvers in an attempt to keep up at the higher levels, fighting style probably great weapon since spear and staffs are both versatile weapons and so is a longsword which I can use with dedicated weapon.
But I wanted to see if I couldn't do a pure class, and since Monk didn't work I thought. Hey why not the other Wisdom based martial class the ranger. Well didn't want to do gloomstalker because I am well over and done with seeing that class every time I see a ranger. It is almost always a 3 level dip to gloomstalker, so didn't want to do that. I had heard both drake and beastmaster were good, but initially didn't really pay them any attention because companion idea wasn't what I was originally going for. So I decided ok let's see, Horizon walker? no it takes a bonus action to do its thing and at 11 it needs a very specific scenario to do the thing the fighter does for free which is attack 3 times. So its bonus action is just worse than a feat and its 11 means it can, on occasion, keep up, but is also spreading the damage around instead of just dropping the one guy. Ok so Monster slayer, same problem. Swarm keeper, ok the bonus action problem isn't there, but the damage is still super low, and the battlefield control I can match with battlemaster so this didn't really help. Same with Fey wanderer, Summon fey is cool, 6 levels earlier when the druid or the warlock got it, at least it is free.
But I will admit at least beast master does seem to keep up if I wanted to go all druidic warrior if using tasha's or basically make the beast the primary side of things if I wanted to use the classic version.
Dracon Warden surprisingly doesn't keep up as well as I thought it would. The 1d6 from the pet is no action from you, cool. The bonus action attack though scales very poorly as by the time you hit 11 3+PB is a 55% chance to hit. And 2d6+PB is only about 11 damage on average with that bonus action if it hits. So I thought, lets check hunter. Ok 1d8, but not using my bonus action so ok still not great as established previously, but something. Giant, well that uses my reaction now, horde breaker, very specific scenario that may or may not ever come up. Ok well how does it scale to 11, AoE attack, which lead to this thread finding out, that much like horde breaker, super situational. Which lead to the conclusion, well if monster slayer, swarm keeper, fey wanderer, hunter and drakewarden all have the same level 11 effectiveness drop off, and gloomstalker is like the only one I see anyone talk about..... wow ranger just falls off at 11 just like the poor monk.
Of course I could always just do fighter. Start with +3 wisdom and do, runic knight, battlemaster, or samurai with GWM instead of Polearm and be just as good at the skills I wanted, especially if I pick V. human and skill expert start with the outlander background and now I forage and navigate wilderness fine, but the idea that fighter would somehow make the better wisdom based martial doesn't sit right with me.
In general I feel Ranger, Monk, Rogue and Barbarian (do not know about artificer), all fall off at the 11 to 14 tier of play at the very least by comparison to the only other 2 martial classes Fighter and Paladin. Paladin almost doesn't care about its subclass it is just "i'm a paladin doing paladin things." Same with fighter. It just feels bad.
At 11th rangers start getting a cool subclass boon that equates to extra damage or a powerful unique feature.
the levels onward 12-14 Are unique because as a ranger You now have to use more Resources to stay near the top which is fine because no one class should sit high at all tiers of play. but being able to access ranger 3rd level spells is great for any half-caster as a melee ranger remember You now can move through non-magic difficult terrain and plants better than some others so mobile striking with Ashardalon’s Stride or running in with a horde of Conjure Animals is great fun and as long as you keep concentration you are doing both normal damage{no HM of course} + those spells. plant growth also can just be so fun to find places to use.{there is a very slight chance you can get a dm to rule the "normal plants" as non-magical} You could also go the route of wind wall and create an enemy line where they have to approach to attack the party{check with your dm about ordinary most will include spell projectiles that say "bolt" and such}.
The subclass boons are what I am talking about being weak. Other than beast master and drake warden.
Hunter gets a super small AOE that is much too situational to be reliable damage boost, Fey wanderer has its 1d4 once per round become a 1d6 (average 1 damage increase) and gets a meh spell in summon fey, Horizon walkers bonus action ability goes to 2d8 from 1d8, this is a damage boost of average of 4.5, and it still uses your bonus action and bonus action PAM is still more damage if you have dueling fighting style, and it gets a third attack, as long as there are at least 3 targets and you spread that damage out.... fighters get 3 attacks period, no caveats. Monster slayers level 11 is basically crappy version of counterspell, finally swarm keeper, damage goes from d6 to d8, again 1 damage boost on average. So, all-in-all, no rangers subclass feature at 11 does not really equate to more damage or a cool feature, with very few notable exceptions in beast master. Drake warden just gets the breath weapon, so you know, fireball, but on a martial (that is cool) and 6 levels late (that's not cool).
Fighter gets a whole extra attack, even if only having 1 handed weapon that is an average of 11.5 damage increase assuming you hit 1 more time than you did before with this one extra attack. Paladin gets an extra 1d8 on all of its attacks, polearm master with a spear means this is a total of 13.5 damage increase (assuming all attacks hit, so likely a little less). These are damage boosts, Ranger's subclass "damage boosts" are a joke.
Though land stride at 8 + 3rd level spells at 9 are cool. Especially with the plant growth (plant growth I argue pretty heavily is not magical, the effect is instantaneous and has no duration, the plants grow magically, but once grown they are just plants.)
Why do you even need to keep up with a Fighter in melee in the first place though? Fighting is literally all they can do so it's fine if they are ahead in that area. Meanwhile Rangers have so much more utility in their baseclass as well as their subclasses. The game is not about getting first place in some damage recap after every fight or something lol
Another thing I noticed is that you keep calling the Ranger a WIS based martial. That's not quite correct. They are a WIS based half-caster. Their martial part is still mostly DEX based (STR is possible but just means you're making things even harder for yourself). The caster part however isn't there to balance out the martial part damage-wise. It does that too to some degree but it's also there to give you more tools for your adventuring day.
Also you keep talking about subclass features as if that's all there is to the Ranger. At level 11 they also get an additional 3rd level spell slot. That could be an additional 8 Velociraptors with Conjure Animals (one of the most broken things in the game in case you weren't aware), 16 Attacks at advantage that each deal 5/4 damage. Definitely more than the Fighter gets.
If you are just interested in hitting stuff with your large stick, then better stick (pun intended) with the Fighter. Ranger is not the class for you. Come back when you're tired of just hitting stuff and are more interested in other aspects of the game. Then you might find out why people actually like playing Ranger too.
I've never encountered a forum where I got this many "talking to a wall" impressions as this one...
Ah. So this post was all just a bad-faith (and half-assed) attempt at a "gotcha" moment to try to prove a point about Rangers being bad. Got it
It sounds like you should just play a fighter that also focuses on wisdom and skills. Fighters are literally designed to deal damage. I think you also find that all of the other classes that feature dexterity don’t “do as much damage“ as those that feature strength. Dexterity is a much more powerful stat.
Personally, I think you are over valuing pure damage output a little. You also seem to be trying to take a mold that works for fighter and apply it successfully to something else, and it’s not working. Let’s try this mold for rogue or cleric or wizard. It won’t work. Why? Because they are literally built differently.
I love that you think feats shouldn’t be the end all be all. I agree. Feats help martials deal damage. Sure. Feats have a cost though, both by not getting an ASI and not picking another feat.
Strength fighters and paladins are going to be tough to beat for single target, single turn, melee damage. They’re just built that way. But! They have almost zero tools to deal with Range or multiple enemies. Not to mention everything other than just dealing damage.
A fighter doing the spear/shield/PAM thing at level 11 is doing 41. A warlock is 40.5. A gloomstalker (4-round combat) is 34.25. A hunter is 30.5, it’s doing 35 with colossus slayer, 33.13 with horde breaker only happening once (the difference here is the hunter has the potential to do more, situationally). A beast master with a wolf and not using PAM (just rapier, so open bonus action and a feat or ASI for something else) is doing 33.5. A barbarian with an axe is 29 plus more critical. A rogue with two short swords is 33. A battle smith is 31.5 plus their 2d6 thing. A monk is doing 38, and more if they have the setup, like a fireball.
Its all relative. Damage is great and all. Essential even. But how much damage mixed with what else a PC can do is more important for me.
It's also worth noting that while the Ranger T3 attacks are definitely conditional, they also do come with riders.
Beast Masters with wolves get pack tactics and the chance to knock a target prone. Ditto beast of the land. The Horizon Walker is doing exactly the same as a Paladin that isn't smiting...but they also get free teleportation riders. Slayer's Counter automatically saves for the effect that procced it. So on and so forth.
A Fighter gets a consistent third attack and...that's it. Maybe more damage if the Ranger doesn't meet the requirements for their third attack, but they get nothing else to control the flow of battle. And I'm not even getting into the Ranger's spellcasting that improves their dpr far beyond anything a Fighter can possibly dream of (the Horizon Walker's Haste; Conjure Animals.)
It’s level 13, not 11, but check out guardian of nature from XGtE. That might fill in the gap your looking for.
That's what the skills are for. The only thing I couldn't do with the fighter that I could do with the ranger besides damage is healing. Skills checks kind of handle the rest and ranger doesn't get enough extra here to justify. Also I feel like you assumed fighter couldnt go dex or that ranger couldnt go strength. They both can do both, the fighter is just more effective at both. Ranger is slightly more maneuverable, same with monk. Rogue's I also said fall behind, but at least they are still better at skills and more maneuverable thanks to cunning action. Clerics are full casters, full casters get crazy stuff they can do, and I would never presume to compare a martial to a full caster because it simply is not fair to the martial. Also ya, I saw the Gift of Nature spell. That once per long rest spell (at 13) would help quite a bit (and having 3, 3rd level spells really helps out as well when keeping up with martials), but it is really 15 where most rangers catch up. That final feature is usually pretty awesome for them. I may try to multi-class after 9 for a 2 level dip in something, maybe fighter, and then go back to ranger and take it to 15 so that the level 17 can be another big power spike. I was just noticing and paying lip to points where fall off happened. (also if I only cared about damage I would be saying casters fall off at 11, but i am not because 6th level spells are bonkers).
I feel like everyone here assumes fighters just hits stuff. What I mean by "wisdom based martial class" is a class that utilizes martial skills that can also benefit from having good wisdom so they can have wisdom based skills. Honestly if you guys think fighters "just hit things" I invite you to build more fighters, more specifically, build more interesting fighters I was talking about ranger sublcasses because they don't get anything except a subclass feature at 11, I wasn't talking about fighter subclasses, because it didn't need one to stay relevant into that next tier of play. Conjure animals (as my GM likes to put it) he gets to pick the animals, and sometimes they are useful, sometimes less so. Still, I feel I got all the info I needed to me, monks, rangers, rogues and Barbarians all don't really stack up to paladin's, pure casters and fighters in the 11-14 or 15 mark all that well. If I want to play a nature based class, probably going to stick with druid. If I want to play a class with a companion Ranger is definite going to be my go to, both the drake and beast are super cool and well balanced. If I want to play someone that is good at fighting with, wisdom based skills, or dex based skills or any skills as their secondary thing, Fighter is the go to. If I want to play someone that is just skill monkey without having to go magical, rogue. Unfortunately, no reason to play monk. Barbarian, I could probably make a tank build, but probably multi-class out around level 6 or so.
Edit: I am still very interested in trying a ranger multi-class build that helps it keep up better at 11, and then push ranger further since those 4th and 5th level spells are so juicy.
I have tried to keep Good faith discussion on my part and after your post (#22) I realized What you were after and that some of your preferences were being construed as bad faith when they weren't at all. Phrases like "no reason" certainly don't help your case. {I am constantly reminded of Bill Burs No reason to hit a woman skit} But you have actually been a decent counter discussion participant.
Still it sounds like the "slowing" of damage progress gets under your skin and you are dissatisfied. To that I respond you either are holding the whole game to High optimization standards or are just "trying to have your cake and eat it too"
For conjure animals-Even poor choice animals still do decent in combat.
I actually like many of the fighter subclasses they can do things that no other class can do. Especially the battle master. At the same time there are a lot of un-calculable for ranger that are also getting pushed to the side. Many people treat tasha's exhaustion removal as game breaking. Many people think their skill checks should be able to match Favored terrain But they can't. why Because they are unique and holding a sole adventuring space means there is value because no one else can. like I said every class has dips and the fact that a ranger is still ok at its lowest is amazing fun and a solid choice for any party.
I encourage you to join in the https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/class-forums/ranger/138865-damage-isnt-everything-but-a-ranger-can-survive#c4 discussion and do a "fighter test" yourself. Please just keep it fun.
Eh. This post was clearly in bad faith from the start. Best to let it die.
Will do. One thing of note, which is both a huge + for classes like ranger and extremely small negative for them as well. Is GM's design encounters around characters. Huge + means if you want areas to shine with niche abilities, talk to dm and you can have some cool stand out moments. These moments cant happen with other party comps. Also always remember this is a team game. Being unable to do something, in my mind, can be a good thing, because that is what team mates are for :). But ya will definitely do.
Will do. One thing of note, which is both a huge + for classes like ranger and extremely small negative for them as well. Is GM's design encounters around characters. Huge + means if you want areas to shine with niche abilities, talk to dm and you can have some cool stand out moments. These moments cant happen with other party comps. Also always remember this is a team game. Being unable to do something, in my mind, can be a good thing, because that is what team mates are for :). But ya will definitely do.
There's so many things wrong in this post and the one before this one, I don't even know where to begin and honestly I don't get the feeling it's worth the effort either. You seem to be pretty set with your opinions. All I'm going to say is that Rangers are still good at fighting and that they can do more than just healing that doesn't get covered by skill checks. They just aren't the best at fighting and that's okay. There can always be only one that is the best at something and 5e is a very forgiving system anyway.
I've never encountered a forum where I got this many "talking to a wall" impressions as this one...
You (OP) seem to really value a set amount of damage, in a certain way, against a certain type of enemy. That’s unfortunate because your list of barbarians, rogues, monks, and rangers are, not only more fun to play, but are much more useful to a party than a melee martial “stick”.
I promise you a dm can make any class shine or falter by just choosing specific encounters or enemies. This is a universal. some dms tend to anti-favor ranger features but there are still ways to keep up.
I find most uses of the community use of "situational" lack a well developed frequency analysis.
Every character is more than a melee martial stick. That is not unique to any of those classes.
What I’m saying, and I suspect you know this already, is your value system, which you are of course entitled to, is biased towards a very specific function. And with that you have little value in other functions.