I'm trying to build the 'stereotypical' Ranger as a thought exercise. This character would fill the party role of being a scout as well as a tracker. He should be good at shooting a bow and not utterly helpless in melee (I understand that it's hard to spec for both). My only caveats are that the character is limited to ten levels and Point Buy is used for stats. IMHO if your character starts at level 1 and it takes more than ten levels for you to be 'done' then your idea is too complex. I prefer the V Human but I'm not married to that particular race. Multiclassing is allowed.
I'm going to list a few things that I think a Ranger (as I've described them) should have:
Good Perception (+5 or higher) because if you can't see it, it'll get you
Good Survival (+5 or higher) since this is used for tracking as well as simply knowing what is and isn't safe to consume
Good Athletics (+5 or higher) because you never know when you'll have to climb, leap, or swim
Good Nature (+5 or better) since that's where you spend most of your time
Agree with sfPanzer here. If you're looking to de-emphasize magic as being not Tolkien-esque in rangers, focus on the protection, detection/location, healing and scouting spells which could be flavoured as more the special abilities of the Dunedain. And if you are looking for Aragorn himself, go Half Elf, the extra skills would be nice and Half Elf is accurate-ish.
I don't see any where where In the original post the tolken-esque ranger de emphasizes magic. I also don't see that narratively. Tolken's ranger seems to mix in magic as well. When Aragorn uses a "useless" Plant to suddenly cure Frodo. That is exactly how I would view Lesser/greater restoration being cast. almost every ranger Weapon spell is just "magic enough" to be flavored either way. and lets not forget Aragorn is some form of "Minion master" as eagles and ghosts are just appearing to help the party on occasion. I would lean towards Fey Wanderer for a tolken-esque ranger. {Now I know the main summon feature is past 10 but its still alot like Aragorn to be uncharismatic and still have decent charisma checks}
I also think the value of favored terrain{natural explorer} is too good and fits this type of ranger better than others. a ranger in their own terrain is the only way a player should be able to get Numbers, exazt sizes and timing of of the thing you are tracking. I think too many people downplay FT as situational but never really think about how situational it is. for climbing a ranger can just bring a climbers kit and get advantage on any necessary checks. spells and other party members Can help cover the other two benefits of deft explorer. {exaustion removal is the hardest but not impossible}
Just go with a regular Ranger and fluff your spell as natural abilities. Simple and elegant. Goodberry can be done as you Ranger finding fruits and health plants for the party to eat. Hunter’s Mark can be represented as your Ranger getting focus on a specific target, kind of looking for a weak spot. Mechanics are there to facilitate and guide you though the process, flavor is free. You could even go all-in DEX and reflavor a Rapier as an elven Longsword or something.
Currently playing a half elf 4th lvl rogue assassin, 6th lvl ranger hunter but run him as a Tolkien ranger with outlander. A crap load of skills useful as a ranger.
Archer fighting style, sharpshooter, Elven Accuracy. Using his plus 11 stealth I start most rounds with an assassin strike with is a crit on any hit you have surprise on and a sneak attack. 1d8, 2d6, hunters prey 1d6, times 2 for the crit. So 2d8, 6d6 plus 10 damage from sharp shooter for the 1st shot and a second shot that is still potentially a crit and elven accuracy allows me to re-roll a dice if I have advantage which also is a sneak attack.. plus colossus slayer’s d8 to damaged opponents and the hunters mark.
Relqynn can track with the best of them. Uses good berry and pass with out trace to keep his party moving quickly and safely through enemy territory.
He is a blast to play and the skills and assassin attack plus the free action using cunning action to hide, disengage, or dash is super useful. And favored enemy and natural explorer makes for a Tolkien ranger flavor.
I'm trying to build the 'stereotypical' Ranger as a thought exercise. This character would fill the party role of being a scout as well as a tracker. He should be good at shooting a bow and not utterly helpless in melee (I understand that it's hard to spec for both). My only caveats are that the character is limited to ten levels and Point Buy is used for stats. IMHO if your character starts at level 1 and it takes more than ten levels for you to be 'done' then your idea is too complex. I prefer the V Human but I'm not married to that particular race. Multiclassing is allowed.
I'm going to list a few things that I think a Ranger (as I've described them) should have:
Good Perception (+5 or higher) because if you can't see it, it'll get you
Good Survival (+5 or higher) since this is used for tracking as well as simply knowing what is and isn't safe to consume
Good Athletics (+5 or higher) because you never know when you'll have to climb, leap, or swim
Good Nature (+5 or better) since that's where you spend most of your time
Thanks in advance
Assuming you want the +5 at 5th level this is not hard at all. Because this is very MAD you will want to play a Human, Mountain Dwarf or a Half-Elf
S16 D16 C14 I10 W12 at 1st level. Charisma would be 9 with a Human or 8 with a Dwarf or half Elf.
Pick a background that gets you one of those skills you want and take the other 3 from the Ranger pool
Take your Deft Explorer expertise in Nature and take your ASI in Wisdom at 4th level. When you make 5th level will be: Athletics +6, Survival +5, Perception +5, Nature +6
Pick up a Pole Arm or Great Axe for Melee and the Longbow you want to use for ranged.
As far as subclass if you don't want to lean to far into magical/fantasy stuff I would take Gloomstalker. Hunter would work though too.
You will have a character that is good in melee or at ranged and has the skills you are looking for.
If you want a +5 at 1st level it is a tougher build and it can be done but you won't be great with a Bow. This is done best with a Half-Elf or Mountain Dwarf. Here is the build:
S16 D14 C10 I12 W16 Ch 8 at 1st level. If you go human you would have a 9 constitution and a 9 Charimsa, which is worse IMO.
With expertise in nature, at 1st level this will give you Athletics, Survival, Perception and Nature all at +5.
V. Human with Sharpshooter, five levels of Ranger (Hunter), five levels of Rogue (Scout). Stats 10/20/14/12/14/8. You get
expertise in five skills (Athletics +8, Nature +9, Perception +10, Stealth +13, Survival +10) and two other skills to choose from, like Investigation and Persuasion.
two attacks per turn
Uncanny Dodge to shrug off melee damage
3d6 Sneak Attack damage
Colossus slayer for an extra d8 if they're wounded
Aragorn in particular, and the rangers as a group (the little we see of them) have never really struck me as either rogues in the DnD sense or full class rangers. To my mind they are all ranger fighter. Or some potentially ranger Druid multiclasses. Aragorn especially is not a L10 character- he starts the trilogy in tier 4 and finishes as a L20/epic character. I see him as a Ranger 4 (Gloomstalker)/Fighter 16 (Champion).
Aragorn in particular, and the rangers as a group (the little we see of them) have never really struck me as either rogues in the DnD sense or full class rangers. To my mind they are all ranger fighter. Or some potentially ranger Druid multiclasses. Aragorn especially is not a L10 character- he starts the trilogy in tier 4 and finishes as a L20/epic character. I see him as a Ranger 4 (Gloomstalker)/Fighter 16 (Champion).
Actually I would argue in D&D parlance he is all fighter, with a background that gives him skills in nature and survival.
Aragorn in particular, and the rangers as a group (the little we see of them) have never really struck me as either rogues in the DnD sense or full class rangers. To my mind they are all ranger fighter. Or some potentially ranger Druid multiclasses. Aragorn especially is not a L10 character- he starts the trilogy in tier 4 and finishes as a L20/epic character. I see him as a Ranger 4 (Gloomstalker)/Fighter 16 (Champion).
Actually I would argue in D&D parlance he is all fighter, with a background that gives him skills in nature and survival.
Aragorn excels at tracking and woodcraft. Not really the realm of a fighter. Gimli and Boromir are more pure fighters.
Aragorn in particular, and the rangers as a group (the little we see of them) have never really struck me as either rogues in the DnD sense or full class rangers. To my mind they are all ranger fighter. Or some potentially ranger Druid multiclasses. Aragorn especially is not a L10 character- he starts the trilogy in tier 4 and finishes as a L20/epic character. I see him as a Ranger 4 (Gloomstalker)/Fighter 16 (Champion).
Actually I would argue in D&D parlance he is all fighter, with a background that gives him skills in nature and survival.
Aragorn excels at tracking and woodcraft. Not really the realm of a fighter. Gimli and Boromir are more pure fighters.
This is where multiple builds work. To build similar end results.
Some people think that expertise is enough for tracking and survival. Those people might argue he is mostly fighter or tasha's ranger.
Some people think outlander is enough. (Which makes me question their understanding of the game)
To me the "ear to the ground" scene from the movie directs me to the phb tracking features.
Aragorn in particular, and the rangers as a group (the little we see of them) have never really struck me as either rogues in the DnD sense or full class rangers. To my mind they are all ranger fighter. Or some potentially ranger Druid multiclasses. Aragorn especially is not a L10 character- he starts the trilogy in tier 4 and finishes as a L20/epic character. I see him as a Ranger 4 (Gloomstalker)/Fighter 16 (Champion).
Actually I would argue in D&D parlance he is all fighter, with a background that gives him skills in nature and survival.
Aragorn excels at tracking and woodcraft. Not really the realm of a fighter. Gimli and Boromir are more pure fighters.
I did not say Aragorn was a general fighter, he is a fighter with specific proficiencies in nature and survival, with a high intelligence and wisdom as opposed to Gimli and Bromir who probably have proficiencies in things like Athletics and History. Legolas also is a fighter, but pretty distinct from the other two.
Survival and Nature skills are tracking and woodcraft, and any character can get proficiency in them, a fighter that has proficiency and high statistics excels at tracking and woodcraft. Nothing Aragorn does in the book respect to woodcraft or tracking is anything that would not normally be done with a survival, nature (or medicine) check in D&D, nor is anything he does specific to the Ranger class.
I also believe that Aragorn at one point dons Isildur's plate armor (i.e. heavy armor) and he never casts any spells, nor does he have a pet or display any of the subclass abilities associated with a D&D 5E Ranger.
There is no doubt about it, mechanically and in terms of flavor Aragorn is a D&D5E Fighter. Yes he is called a Ranger in the book, but he has almost none of the flavor and mechanics of a 5E Ranger. 1E .... that is a different story, but that class is completely different.
Again our definition of excell is different. I believe his supernatural tracking can only be represented by "exact numbers" and knowing "how long"
As for him using spells... a useless plant healing frodo seems like a form of lesser or greater restoration.
He could easily have been many of the ranger subclasses. Hunter, fey wanderer (for his weird charisma and elvish connections) beastmaster for his horse connection (yes I know it's "almost" impossible to get a pet mount for medium creature's), monster hunter
You will never get an exact match between fiction and game mechanics.(even official stories) but ranger seems the easiest to create a rough approximation.
Yes, the outlander background grants survival and athletics, a variant background could give nature and survival as background skills. In 1e ranger was a fighter subclass not a separate class. The character in my sig worked up to L17 as a 1e ranger, I tried rebuilding him here in DDB as a L4 ranger/L16 fighter and it worked very well to recreate what he was like back in 1e. I could see Aragorn as either a similar R4/F16 or as a pure fighter 16-20 with nature and survival skills from the background. By 5e standards neither should be a ranger or they should be ranger fighter multiclasses with the fighter dominant. Ranger, as a class/subclass, has evolved tremendously over the 40+years of the game and where we are today is nothing like the 1e version that was to some extent modeled off of Aragorn. When trying to model Aragorn we have to remember that evolution and allow for it in our modeling. That means designing him as much less of a D&D 5e ranger and much more of a fighter with nature and survival skills. In classing Aragorn out we have to take into account his history. When the LOTRs starts he is 87 years old having adventures in the north then as a warrior and leader in the armies of Rohan and Gondor before going off on his own in the south and east before returning to the north. The actions in the south, east and north I can see as ranger exploits or at least involving nature and survival checks. I don’t see anything in his history that suggests a rogue background so that leaves ranger and or fighter. His lack of magical ability links more to fighter than 5e ranger so a L4 ranger, L16 Fighter makes sense.
Again our definition of excell is different. I believe his supernatural tracking can only be represented by "exact numbers" and knowing "how long"
As for him using spells... a useless plant healing frodo seems like a form of lesser or greater restoration.
No it is an herbal remedy, similar to the Herbalism kit as detailed in Xanathar's. Also if it was restoration it would have actually healed him, not just kept him alive for a while longer.
He could easily have been many of the ranger subclasses. Hunter, fey wanderer (for his weird charisma and elvish connections) beastmaster for his horse connection (yes I know it's "almost" impossible to get a pet mount for medium creature's), monster hunter
He is not a Fey Wanderer because he does not have antlers or a dancing shadow or any of the physical changes associated with that subclass. Hunter could be ok I guess, but nothing stands out from that subclass.
You will never get an exact match between fiction and game mechanics.(even official stories) but ranger seems the easiest to create a rough approximation.
I agree and the best approximation is a Banneret Fighter with proficiency in the herbalism kit, suirvival and nature. I am not sure what you mean by "exact tracking" but that could easily be a background feature too as things like finding food or being able to perfectly recall terrain. With Banneret Fighter, you have everything covered that he displayed in the fiction, there are multiple connections and nothing that conflicts and "doesn't work".
Spells are the biggest reason a 5E Ranger does not work for me, but most of the subclasses clash too either in flavor or in mechanics. I think he is closer to a Scout Rogue than to a Ranger of any type (although that is still not without clashes like a fighter is).
Maybe he is multiclassed? a 1st level Ranger (so no spells) with the rest of his levels in fighter?
The ability with the kingsfoil plant is not a class trait but more of a background/genetic trait because he is of the bloodline of the kings of name or, Arnor and Gondor so it’s a special ability not a class trait. Given that, it pretty well removes spells from Aragorn’s abilities. I could still see him being a L3/4 (mechanically for the ASI) ranger (probably hunter with HordeBreaker) multiclassed to Fighter ( probably champion) for the rest of his levels. If we see him in Bree as a L17 multiclass (L1-3R/L14-16F) then the most he could have for spells would be 3 ( probably CW, GB ( as paths for the kingsfoil) and HM (to improve tracking as well as combat)) all of which would not be very noticeable as magic. As a L3 Hunter he could take the archery fighting style then if he took horde breaker he would get an extra attack every round against a second foe, with favored enemy (orcs and humans) he would be covered for knowledge etc about orcs, Haradrim, etc. I would give him deft explorer rather than a favored terrain. Then as a champion fighter he has second wind and action surge (once) and probably great weapon fighting style with a longsword often wielded two handed. As a champion he would have improved critical, remarkable athlete and a second (third) fighting style (probably defense). As a fighter (14) he would have 3 attacks, 2 indomitables and 5 ASIs for stats and/or feats. That really pretty well covers his abilities as the books give them. The only 2 situations that are sort of iffy are his use of kingsfoil and his calling up the ghost army - both of which are closely linked not to his class but to his being the king. Remember that the kingsfoil doesn’t actually heal damage but blocks/destroys the effect of the “black breath” of the Nazghul. The ghosts don’t destroy him and his party because he proves to them that he is the king and holds them with their oath till their service is completed. At worst this involves a wisdom and a couple of charisma checks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm trying to build the 'stereotypical' Ranger as a thought exercise. This character would fill the party role of being a scout as well as a tracker. He should be good at shooting a bow and not utterly helpless in melee (I understand that it's hard to spec for both). My only caveats are that the character is limited to ten levels and Point Buy is used for stats. IMHO if your character starts at level 1 and it takes more than ten levels for you to be 'done' then your idea is too complex. I prefer the V Human but I'm not married to that particular race. Multiclassing is allowed.
I'm going to list a few things that I think a Ranger (as I've described them) should have:
Good Perception (+5 or higher) because if you can't see it, it'll get you
Good Survival (+5 or higher) since this is used for tracking as well as simply knowing what is and isn't safe to consume
Good Athletics (+5 or higher) because you never know when you'll have to climb, leap, or swim
Good Nature (+5 or better) since that's where you spend most of your time
Thanks in advance
Agree with sfPanzer here. If you're looking to de-emphasize magic as being not Tolkien-esque in rangers, focus on the protection, detection/location, healing and scouting spells which could be flavoured as more the special abilities of the Dunedain. And if you are looking for Aragorn himself, go Half Elf, the extra skills would be nice and Half Elf is accurate-ish.
I don't see any where where In the original post the tolken-esque ranger de emphasizes magic. I also don't see that narratively. Tolken's ranger seems to mix in magic as well. When Aragorn uses a "useless" Plant to suddenly cure Frodo. That is exactly how I would view Lesser/greater restoration being cast. almost every ranger Weapon spell is just "magic enough" to be flavored either way. and lets not forget Aragorn is some form of "Minion master" as eagles and ghosts are just appearing to help the party on occasion. I would lean towards Fey Wanderer for a tolken-esque ranger. {Now I know the main summon feature is past 10 but its still alot like Aragorn to be uncharismatic and still have decent charisma checks}
I also think the value of favored terrain{natural explorer} is too good and fits this type of ranger better than others. a ranger in their own terrain is the only way a player should be able to get Numbers, exazt sizes and timing of of the thing you are tracking. I think too many people downplay FT as situational but never really think about how situational it is. for climbing a ranger can just bring a climbers kit and get advantage on any necessary checks. spells and other party members Can help cover the other two benefits of deft explorer. {exaustion removal is the hardest but not impossible}
Just go with a regular Ranger and fluff your spell as natural abilities. Simple and elegant. Goodberry can be done as you Ranger finding fruits and health plants for the party to eat. Hunter’s Mark can be represented as your Ranger getting focus on a specific target, kind of looking for a weak spot. Mechanics are there to facilitate and guide you though the process, flavor is free. You could even go all-in DEX and reflavor a Rapier as an elven Longsword or something.
Currently playing a half elf 4th lvl rogue assassin, 6th lvl ranger hunter but run him as a Tolkien ranger with outlander. A crap load of skills useful as a ranger.
Archer fighting style, sharpshooter, Elven Accuracy. Using his plus 11 stealth I start most rounds with an assassin strike with is a crit on any hit you have surprise on and a sneak attack. 1d8, 2d6, hunters prey 1d6, times 2 for the crit. So 2d8, 6d6 plus 10 damage from sharp shooter for the 1st shot and a second shot that is still potentially a crit and elven accuracy allows me to re-roll a dice if I have advantage which also is a sneak attack.. plus colossus slayer’s d8 to damaged opponents and the hunters mark.
Relqynn can track with the best of them. Uses good berry and pass with out trace to keep his party moving quickly and safely through enemy territory.
He is a blast to play and the skills and assassin attack plus the free action using cunning action to hide, disengage, or dash is super useful. And favored enemy and natural explorer makes for a Tolkien ranger flavor.
Pre tashas hunter ranger fits this like....extremely well
Assuming you want the +5 at 5th level this is not hard at all. Because this is very MAD you will want to play a Human, Mountain Dwarf or a Half-Elf
S16 D16 C14 I10 W12 at 1st level. Charisma would be 9 with a Human or 8 with a Dwarf or half Elf.
Pick a background that gets you one of those skills you want and take the other 3 from the Ranger pool
Take your Deft Explorer expertise in Nature and take your ASI in Wisdom at 4th level. When you make 5th level will be: Athletics +6, Survival +5, Perception +5, Nature +6
Pick up a Pole Arm or Great Axe for Melee and the Longbow you want to use for ranged.
As far as subclass if you don't want to lean to far into magical/fantasy stuff I would take Gloomstalker. Hunter would work though too.
You will have a character that is good in melee or at ranged and has the skills you are looking for.
If you want a +5 at 1st level it is a tougher build and it can be done but you won't be great with a Bow. This is done best with a Half-Elf or Mountain Dwarf. Here is the build:
S16 D14 C10 I12 W16 Ch 8 at 1st level. If you go human you would have a 9 constitution and a 9 Charimsa, which is worse IMO.
With expertise in nature, at 1st level this will give you Athletics, Survival, Perception and Nature all at +5.
Now that I think on it just about every ranger I have ran is styled after Aragorn.
V. Human with Sharpshooter, five levels of Ranger (Hunter), five levels of Rogue (Scout). Stats 10/20/14/12/14/8. You get
Aragorn in particular, and the rangers as a group (the little we see of them) have never really struck me as either rogues in the DnD sense or full class rangers. To my mind they are all ranger fighter. Or some potentially ranger Druid multiclasses. Aragorn especially is not a L10 character- he starts the trilogy in tier 4 and finishes as a L20/epic character. I see him as a Ranger 4 (Gloomstalker)/Fighter 16 (Champion).
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Actually I would argue in D&D parlance he is all fighter, with a background that gives him skills in nature and survival.
Aragorn excels at tracking and woodcraft. Not really the realm of a fighter. Gimli and Boromir are more pure fighters.
This is where multiple builds work. To build similar end results.
Some people think that expertise is enough for tracking and survival. Those people might argue he is mostly fighter or tasha's ranger.
Some people think outlander is enough. (Which makes me question their understanding of the game)
To me the "ear to the ground" scene from the movie directs me to the phb tracking features.
I did not say Aragorn was a general fighter, he is a fighter with specific proficiencies in nature and survival, with a high intelligence and wisdom as opposed to Gimli and Bromir who probably have proficiencies in things like Athletics and History. Legolas also is a fighter, but pretty distinct from the other two.
Survival and Nature skills are tracking and woodcraft, and any character can get proficiency in them, a fighter that has proficiency and high statistics excels at tracking and woodcraft. Nothing Aragorn does in the book respect to woodcraft or tracking is anything that would not normally be done with a survival, nature (or medicine) check in D&D, nor is anything he does specific to the Ranger class.
I also believe that Aragorn at one point dons Isildur's plate armor (i.e. heavy armor) and he never casts any spells, nor does he have a pet or display any of the subclass abilities associated with a D&D 5E Ranger.
There is no doubt about it, mechanically and in terms of flavor Aragorn is a D&D5E Fighter. Yes he is called a Ranger in the book, but he has almost none of the flavor and mechanics of a 5E Ranger. 1E .... that is a different story, but that class is completely different.
Again our definition of excell is different. I believe his supernatural tracking can only be represented by "exact numbers" and knowing "how long"
As for him using spells... a useless plant healing frodo seems like a form of lesser or greater restoration.
He could easily have been many of the ranger subclasses. Hunter, fey wanderer (for his weird charisma and elvish connections) beastmaster for his horse connection (yes I know it's "almost" impossible to get a pet mount for medium creature's), monster hunter
You will never get an exact match between fiction and game mechanics.(even official stories) but ranger seems the easiest to create a rough approximation.
Yes, the outlander background grants survival and athletics, a variant background could give nature and survival as background skills. In 1e ranger was a fighter subclass not a separate class. The character in my sig worked up to L17 as a 1e ranger, I tried rebuilding him here in DDB as a L4 ranger/L16 fighter and it worked very well to recreate what he was like back in 1e. I could see Aragorn as either a similar R4/F16 or as a pure fighter 16-20 with nature and survival skills from the background. By 5e standards neither should be a ranger or they should be ranger fighter multiclasses with the fighter dominant. Ranger, as a class/subclass, has evolved tremendously over the 40+years of the game and where we are today is nothing like the 1e version that was to some extent modeled off of Aragorn. When trying to model Aragorn we have to remember that evolution and allow for it in our modeling. That means designing him as much less of a D&D 5e ranger and much more of a fighter with nature and survival skills. In classing Aragorn out we have to take into account his history. When the LOTRs starts he is 87 years old having adventures in the north then as a warrior and leader in the armies of Rohan and Gondor before going off on his own in the south and east before returning to the north. The actions in the south, east and north I can see as ranger exploits or at least involving nature and survival checks. I don’t see anything in his history that suggests a rogue background so that leaves ranger and or fighter. His lack of magical ability links more to fighter than 5e ranger so a L4 ranger, L16 Fighter makes sense.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
No it is an herbal remedy, similar to the Herbalism kit as detailed in Xanathar's. Also if it was restoration it would have actually healed him, not just kept him alive for a while longer.
He is not a Fey Wanderer because he does not have antlers or a dancing shadow or any of the physical changes associated with that subclass. Hunter could be ok I guess, but nothing stands out from that subclass.
I agree and the best approximation is a Banneret Fighter with proficiency in the herbalism kit, suirvival and nature. I am not sure what you mean by "exact tracking" but that could easily be a background feature too as things like finding food or being able to perfectly recall terrain. With Banneret Fighter, you have everything covered that he displayed in the fiction, there are multiple connections and nothing that conflicts and "doesn't work".
Spells are the biggest reason a 5E Ranger does not work for me, but most of the subclasses clash too either in flavor or in mechanics. I think he is closer to a Scout Rogue than to a Ranger of any type (although that is still not without clashes like a fighter is).
Maybe he is multiclassed? a 1st level Ranger (so no spells) with the rest of his levels in fighter?
The ability with the kingsfoil plant is not a class trait but more of a background/genetic trait because he is of the bloodline of the kings of name or, Arnor and Gondor so it’s a special ability not a class trait. Given that, it pretty well removes spells from Aragorn’s abilities. I could still see him being a L3/4 (mechanically for the ASI) ranger (probably hunter with HordeBreaker) multiclassed to Fighter ( probably champion) for the rest of his levels. If we see him in Bree as a L17 multiclass (L1-3R/L14-16F) then the most he could have for spells would be 3 ( probably CW, GB ( as paths for the kingsfoil) and HM (to improve tracking as well as combat)) all of which would not be very noticeable as magic. As a L3 Hunter he could take the archery fighting style then if he took horde breaker he would get an extra attack every round against a second foe, with favored enemy (orcs and humans) he would be covered for knowledge etc about orcs, Haradrim, etc. I would give him deft explorer rather than a favored terrain. Then as a champion fighter he has second wind and action surge (once) and probably great weapon fighting style with a longsword often wielded two handed. As a champion he would have improved critical, remarkable athlete and a second (third) fighting style (probably defense). As a fighter (14) he would have 3 attacks, 2 indomitables and 5 ASIs for stats and/or feats. That really pretty well covers his abilities as the books give them. The only 2 situations that are sort of iffy are his use of kingsfoil and his calling up the ghost army - both of which are closely linked not to his class but to his being the king. Remember that the kingsfoil doesn’t actually heal damage but blocks/destroys the effect of the “black breath” of the Nazghul. The ghosts don’t destroy him and his party because he proves to them that he is the king and holds them with their oath till their service is completed. At worst this involves a wisdom and a couple of charisma checks.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.