Why can rangers only choose 2 type of humanoids? what makes them different from the rest of the types?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Born under the watch of something from the furthest corners of the far realms.... It knows all.... it sees all... and it asks: "What is it that you want to see?"... and my answer is... ALL"
Revised Ranger is better, but if you're not using the Revised Ranger.
I think it's balance. So "humanoids" over a LOT of creatures, including most sentient NPCs. Remember humanoid includes: all humans, (half) elves, dwarfs, halfings, gnomes, teiflings, assamar, (half) orcs, goblins, kobolds, etc...
Revised Ranger is better, but if you're not using the Revised Ranger.
I think it's balance. So "humanoids" over a LOT of creatures, including most sentient NPCs. Remember humanoid includes: all humans, (half) elves, dwarfs, halfings, gnomes, teiflings, assamar, (half) orcs, goblins, kobolds, etc...
Revised ranger isn't official yet right ?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Born under the watch of something from the furthest corners of the far realms.... It knows all.... it sees all... and it asks: "What is it that you want to see?"... and my answer is... ALL"
Revised Ranger is better, but if you're not using the Revised Ranger.
I think it's balance. So "humanoids" over a LOT of creatures, including most sentient NPCs. Remember humanoid includes: all humans, (half) elves, dwarfs, halfings, gnomes, teiflings, assamar, (half) orcs, goblins, kobolds, etc...
Revised ranger isn't official yet right ?
Yes and no, it isn’t officially published, but it is legal for Adventure league play, so you can pretty much use it everywhere. I have never had a DM tell me I can’t use revised.
Revised Ranger is better, but if you're not using the Revised Ranger.
I think it's balance. So "humanoids" over a LOT of creatures, including most sentient NPCs. Remember humanoid includes: all humans, (half) elves, dwarfs, halfings, gnomes, teiflings, assamar, (half) orcs, goblins, kobolds, etc...
Revised ranger isn't official yet right ?
Yes and no, it isn’t officially published, but it is legal for Adventure league play, so you can pretty much use it everywhere. I have never had a DM tell me I can’t use revised.
Could you post a citation for the Revised Ranger being AL Legal?
Revised Ranger is better, but if you're not using the Revised Ranger.
I think it's balance. So "humanoids" over a LOT of creatures, including most sentient NPCs. Remember humanoid includes: all humans, (half) elves, dwarfs, halfings, gnomes, teiflings, assamar, (half) orcs, goblins, kobolds, etc...
Revised ranger isn't official yet right ?
Yes and no, it isn’t officially published, but it is legal for Adventure league play, so you can pretty much use it everywhere. I have never had a DM tell me I can’t use revised.
Could you post a citation for the Revised Ranger being AL Legal?
Sure.
”Finally, we come to implementation. If this iteration of the ranger, or a future revision of it, grades high enough, our plan is to present it as a revised ranger in a future D&D sourcebook. Players can select the original ranger or the revised version, though DMs will always be free to use only one or the other. Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
Last paragraph of the first page of the UA pdf it appears in.
Revised Ranger is better, but if you're not using the Revised Ranger.
I think it's balance. So "humanoids" over a LOT of creatures, including most sentient NPCs. Remember humanoid includes: all humans, (half) elves, dwarfs, halfings, gnomes, teiflings, assamar, (half) orcs, goblins, kobolds, etc...
Revised ranger isn't official yet right ?
Yes and no, it isn’t officially published, but it is legal for Adventure league play, so you can pretty much use it everywhere. I have never had a DM tell me I can’t use revised.
Could you post a citation for the Revised Ranger being AL Legal?
Sure.
”Finally, we come to implementation. If this iteration of the ranger, or a future revision of it, grades high enough, our plan is to present it as a revised ranger in a future D&D sourcebook. Players can select the original ranger or the revised version, though DMs will always be free to use only one or the other. Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
Last paragraph of the first page of the UA pdf it appears in.
In its current iteration it is not AL legal as it's not in an official source. That wording just means, when the time comes to officially published, both the original and revised ranger will be AL legal.
Revised Ranger is better, but if you're not using the Revised Ranger.
I think it's balance. So "humanoids" over a LOT of creatures, including most sentient NPCs. Remember humanoid includes: all humans, (half) elves, dwarfs, halfings, gnomes, teiflings, assamar, (half) orcs, goblins, kobolds, etc...
Revised ranger isn't official yet right ?
Yes and no, it isn’t officially published, but it is legal for Adventure league play, so you can pretty much use it everywhere. I have never had a DM tell me I can’t use revised.
Could you post a citation for the Revised Ranger being AL Legal?
Sure.
”Finally, we come to implementation. If this iteration of the ranger, or a future revision of it, grades high enough, our plan is to present it as a revised ranger in a future D&D sourcebook. Players can select the original ranger or the revised version, though DMs will always be free to use only one or the other. Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
Last paragraph of the first page of the UA pdf it appears in.
In its current iteration it is not AL legal as it's not in an official source. That wording just means, when the time comes to officially published, both the original and revised ranger will be AL legal.
“Players can select the original ranger or the revised version... Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
That seems clear cut to me that it is AL legal, but as always, just talk to your DM, doesn’t really matter what we think on here.
Revised Ranger is better, but if you're not using the Revised Ranger.
I think it's balance. So "humanoids" over a LOT of creatures, including most sentient NPCs. Remember humanoid includes: all humans, (half) elves, dwarfs, halfings, gnomes, teiflings, assamar, (half) orcs, goblins, kobolds, etc...
Revised ranger isn't official yet right ?
Yes and no, it isn’t officially published, but it is legal for Adventure league play, so you can pretty much use it everywhere. I have never had a DM tell me I can’t use revised.
Could you post a citation for the Revised Ranger being AL Legal?
Sure.
”Finally, we come to implementation. If this iteration of the ranger, or a future revision of it, grades high enough, our plan is to present it as a revised ranger in a future D&D sourcebook. Players can select the original ranger or the revised version, though DMs will always be free to use only one or the other. Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
Last paragraph of the first page of the UA pdf it appears in.
In its current iteration it is not AL legal as it's not in an official source. That wording just means, when the time comes to officially published, both the original and revised ranger will be AL legal.
“Players can select the original ranger or the revised version... Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
That seems clear cut to me that it is AL legal, but as always, just talk to your DM, doesn’t really matter what we think on here.
You're taking it out of context.
”Finally, we come to implementation. If this iteration of the ranger, or a future revision of it, grades high enough, our plan is to present it as a revised ranger in a future D&D sourcebook. Players can select the original ranger or the revised version, though DMs will always be free to use only one or the other. Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
I bolded all the important key phrases. It being AL legal hinges on presenting the revised ranger in a future D&D book. All of it refers to future tense of WotC officially releasing it in a book.
Also, from the AL FAQ.
"Unearthed Arcana (UA) isn’t an allowed resource; it isn’t available for use without specific campaign documentation."
Since there isn't specific campaign documentation for the revised ranger, it is not allowed.
Revised Ranger is better, but if you're not using the Revised Ranger.
I think it's balance. So "humanoids" over a LOT of creatures, including most sentient NPCs. Remember humanoid includes: all humans, (half) elves, dwarfs, halfings, gnomes, teiflings, assamar, (half) orcs, goblins, kobolds, etc...
Revised ranger isn't official yet right ?
Yes and no, it isn’t officially published, but it is legal for Adventure league play, so you can pretty much use it everywhere. I have never had a DM tell me I can’t use revised.
Could you post a citation for the Revised Ranger being AL Legal?
Sure.
”Finally, we come to implementation. If this iteration of the ranger, or a future revision of it, grades high enough, our plan is to present it as a revised ranger in a future D&D sourcebook. Players can select the original ranger or the revised version, though DMs will always be free to use only one or the other. Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
Last paragraph of the first page of the UA pdf it appears in.
In its current iteration it is not AL legal as it's not in an official source. That wording just means, when the time comes to officially published, both the original and revised ranger will be AL legal.
“Players can select the original ranger or the revised version... Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
That seems clear cut to me that it is AL legal, but as always, just talk to your DM, doesn’t really matter what we think on here.
You're taking it out of context.
”Finally, we come to implementation. If this iteration of the ranger, or a future revision of it, grades high enough, our plan is to present it as a revised ranger in a future D&D sourcebook. Players can select the original ranger or the revised version, though DMs will always be free to use only one or the other. Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
I bolded all the important key phrases. It being AL legal hinges on presenting the revised ranger in a future D&D book. All of it refers to future tense of WotC officially releasing it in a book.
Also, from the AL FAQ.
"Unearthed Arcana (UA) isn’t an allowed resource; it isn’t available for use without specific campaign documentation."
Since there isn't specific campaign documentation for the revised ranger, it is not allowed.
I would argue that the below are two separate statements...
”Finally, we come to implementation. If this iteration of the ranger, or a future revision of it, grades high enough, our plan is to present it as a revised ranger in a future D&D sourcebook."
The first has no bearing on the second, it simply indicates what will be done in the future.
"Players can select the original ranger or the revised version, though DMs will always be free to use only one or the other. Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
The second part, as I interpret it, is saying "will be" as in you can use this now and "will have" as in, let a player switch if they choose to.
Should a published revised version be released in a new sourcebook there would be zero question as to if it was AL qualified, it would be officially published content, alternatively, this being UA content it needs a qualifier to make it AL compatible. Why would they even bother with the second part otherwise?
That is the question you have to answer, why have a qualifier that makes what I am suggesting true, but would do absolutely nothing but confuse people if what you are saying is correct?
Should a published revised version be released in a new sourcebook there would be zero question as to if it was AL qualified, it would be officially published content, alternatively, this being UA content it needs a qualifier to make it AL compatible. Why would they even bother with the second part otherwise?
That is the question you have to answer, why have a qualifier that makes what I am suggesting true, but would do absolutely nothing but confuse people if what you are saying is correct?
To clarify that both versions of Ranger would be valid to use. This would be the first time that an entire class was rebuilt from the ground up for a future book in 5e. Since AL has extra rules on top of the rules in 5e, this was something that they deemed needed clarification.
Also, your point is entirely moot anways as the FAQ specifically forbids unearthed arcana as a valid source for AL.
Yes, but those rules not withstanding, all published content is allowed, so to say that they included the phrase to clarify what to do once it is officially published seems redundant to me. It seems we are at an I pass and I think we need to simply agree to disagree, but I enjoy the spirited discussion and once again it matters not - Players can run it past their DM, they have the final say.
To get things back on track, I (the one time I played a PHB Ranger) picked Humanoid and worked with the DM to figure out the region of the world and what made sense thematically to select the two.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Why can rangers only choose 2 type of humanoids? what makes them different from the rest of the types?
Born under the watch of something from the furthest corners of the far realms.... It knows all.... it sees all... and it asks: "What is it that you want to see?"... and my answer is... ALL"
I assume the designers assume you meet more humanoids than other creatures. That said, revised ranger allows humanoids as a group.
Revised Ranger is better, but if you're not using the Revised Ranger.
I think it's balance. So "humanoids" over a LOT of creatures, including most sentient NPCs.
Remember humanoid includes: all humans, (half) elves, dwarfs, halfings, gnomes, teiflings, assamar, (half) orcs, goblins, kobolds, etc...
Born under the watch of something from the furthest corners of the far realms.... It knows all.... it sees all... and it asks: "What is it that you want to see?"... and my answer is... ALL"
Yes and no, it isn’t officially published, but it is legal for Adventure league play, so you can pretty much use it everywhere. I have never had a DM tell me I can’t use revised.
Could you post a citation for the Revised Ranger being AL Legal?
Sure.
”Finally, we come to implementation. If this iteration of the ranger, or a future revision of it, grades high enough, our plan is to present it as a revised ranger in a future D&D sourcebook. Players can select the original ranger or the revised version, though DMs will always be free to use only one or the other. Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
Last paragraph of the first page of the UA pdf it appears in.
http://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/downloads/UA_RevisedRanger.pdf
In its current iteration it is not AL legal as it's not in an official source. That wording just means, when the time comes to officially published, both the original and revised ranger will be AL legal.
“Players can select the original ranger or the revised version... Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
That seems clear cut to me that it is AL legal, but as always, just talk to your DM, doesn’t really matter what we think on here.
You're taking it out of context.
”Finally, we come to implementation. If this iteration of the ranger, or a future revision of it, grades high enough, our plan is to present it as a revised ranger in a future D&D sourcebook. Players can select the original ranger or the revised version, though DMs will always be free to use only one or the other. Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
I bolded all the important key phrases. It being AL legal hinges on presenting the revised ranger in a future D&D book. All of it refers to future tense of WotC officially releasing it in a book.
Also, from the AL FAQ.
"Unearthed Arcana (UA) isn’t an allowed resource; it isn’t available for use without specific campaign documentation."
Since there isn't specific campaign documentation for the revised ranger, it is not allowed.
I would argue that the below are two separate statements...
”Finally, we come to implementation. If this iteration of the ranger, or a future revision of it, grades high enough, our plan is to present it as a revised ranger in a future D&D sourcebook."
The first has no bearing on the second, it simply indicates what will be done in the future.
"Players can select the original ranger or the revised version, though DMs will always be free to use only one or the other. Both will be legal for D&D Adventurers League play, and players of existing ranger characters will have the option to swap to the revised version. ”
The second part, as I interpret it, is saying "will be" as in you can use this now and "will have" as in, let a player switch if they choose to.
Should a published revised version be released in a new sourcebook there would be zero question as to if it was AL qualified, it would be officially published content, alternatively, this being UA content it needs a qualifier to make it AL compatible. Why would they even bother with the second part otherwise?
That is the question you have to answer, why have a qualifier that makes what I am suggesting true, but would do absolutely nothing but confuse people if what you are saying is correct?
To clarify that both versions of Ranger would be valid to use. This would be the first time that an entire class was rebuilt from the ground up for a future book in 5e. Since AL has extra rules on top of the rules in 5e, this was something that they deemed needed clarification.
Also, your point is entirely moot anways as the FAQ specifically forbids unearthed arcana as a valid source for AL.
Yes, but those rules not withstanding, all published content is allowed, so to say that they included the phrase to clarify what to do once it is officially published seems redundant to me. It seems we are at an I pass and I think we need to simply agree to disagree, but I enjoy the spirited discussion and once again it matters not - Players can run it past their DM, they have the final say.
To get things back on track, I (the one time I played a PHB Ranger) picked Humanoid and worked with the DM to figure out the region of the world and what made sense thematically to select the two.