What do you all think about the 2024 Ranger so far?

Quote from Ophidimancer >>

Ranger isn't built around Hunter's Mark, is a neat feature that has situational uses, but you can also ignore it and still play just fine. 

 When 4 of your features, including your core "Ranger defining" feature Favoured Enemy at level 1, and your level 20 capstone, are about Hunter's mark, is it not fair to say that in some small part that it is built around the feature?

Especially when Favoured Enemy scales with your Ranger level.

I will admit that you can ignore it, and still just play fine, especially as the other three features that care about it are at levels 13, 17, and 20 and most campaigns won't get that far, but to see the design be so heavily influenced by it and then to ignore it feels bad. It is clearly, in my mind, the direction they want to push Ranger players.

Let's say the ranger has a meaningful number of late-game features built around HM. Is that so bad? In the eight years that I have been playing this game, I have never seen a ranger not have HM in their repertoire. The difference now is that using it is better for ranger than anyone else. Even without HM, the 2024 ranger is noticeably more powerful than the 2014 ranger is. It may fall short of perfect and it certainly does not meet certain criteria of what some people think a ranger should be, but it is now a class I am interested in playing and that was absolutely never the case with the 2014 rules. 

The 2014 IMO, just sucked. It sucked. You know what is worse than having a class built around HM? Having a class built around features you cannot use almost always. Favored Enemy was literally useless unless you picked the right monster type for your DM's game. Natural Explorer prevented the DM from giving the party challenges to overcome. You could only change one spell every level gained. By the time Land Stride came online, your encounters where difficult terrain was a thing was almost always magical in nature, making half of the feature useless. Do we even need to talk about Hide in Plain Sight or how the class itself makes this feature invalid just 4 levels after getting it with Vanish or how Pass Without Trace was more useful than HiPS from level 5?

There are far worse things than having actually useful, meaningful class features built around a staple spell. 

You can play a Wizard without casting spells, and be just fine. You can play a Paladin and never use Smite. You can play a Barbarian who never rages. An uninspiring Bard. An unfocused Monk. And you CAN play a Ranger without using Hunter's Mark and be fine.

But why? The point isn't that a Ranger is REQUIRED to use Hunter's Mark. Wizards arent required to cast spells. You could Crossbow it up all day long. But then, what would be the point of the class-defining features that make a Wizard a Wizard? In the same way,  a Ranger not using Hunter's Mark is fine. But- especially from level 13 on- it is the bulk of the class' features. The point is that if you don't use Hunter's Mark (again, especially at higher levels), then you are missing out on all those features. WotC WANTS you to use HM. But then it precludes you from using many of the Ranger's spells. In which case then... what is the point of getting the spells?

And features should be fun. They should be something you WANT to use. They should be thematic, mechanically unique to the class, and scale to be relevant at all tiers of play.

Let's put a spin on this. Imagine if the Paladin's Smite required concentration (many do). But now imagine that it only does a d6 of damage, you must cast it before you attack, and that it doesnt increase damage with spell slot level. Imagine if, instead of an extra d8 on all attacks whether you Smite or not, the Paladin's level 11 feature was that Smites are now still concentration... but that damage can't break it. Imagine if your concentration d6 extra damage Smite now gives you Advantage at level 17, and your Paladin subclass capstone are all that your Smite now does a d10. Now... how fun are those Smites? You can no longer cast them AFTER you hit and so wait for a crit. You just cast it before and hope for a crit. No more using your 4th level slot for all those d8s. You can use a 4th level slot, but it'll just be a d6, same as always. Imagine that Smites were basically Hunter's Mark.  

The point is.... Hunter's Mark kinda sucks. And they've been trying to paint over it for years, but it needs to be scrapped and redesigned at its core. IF it's going to be the Ranger's defining mechanical feature,  it needs to be WAY better, more interesting, and more versatile. I personally don't believe it needs to be the Ranger's defining feature. I think it should only be one tool in your kit. OR it needs to do more. Scale damage up. Bypass resistances. Grant the Ranger defensive bonuses versus the marked. SOMETHING. But making it do more is problematic. There's already Weapon Masteries for debuffs. And too much of that extra damage & status effects begins to sound an awful lot like Smites. 

Watch Treantmonk's videos on revising the 2024 Ranger. And watch Insight Check's video revising the base class. Both look better than the 2024 PHB. And that's also the point. Many people have come up with many ways to revise the Ranger. Or Hunter's Mark.  Or the subclasses. Or some combination.  There are so many options to make Ranger's competitive with other classes in power level and make them mechanically unique and interesting. WotC just did not try anything for the 2024 PHB Ranger, though. They slightly buffed the Tasha's Ranger and called it a day. 

Hunter's Mark doesn't suck compared to anything else you have access to until maybe Ranger level 9. Possibly level 5 if you're Wisdom focused and choose to find, buy, or craft the costly component for Summon Beast. I feel like a spell that is useful up until level 9 and then falls off isn't really sucky.

Hunter's Mark is a nice damage boost through Tier 1 and for the most part Tier 2. The free castings are nice and the fact you don't have to spend a spell preparation on it to use a slot to cast it is nice as well.

However, if you are going to base an entire class with 3 of your 5 class features for Tier 3 and 4 including the capstone on it, then something needs to scale with the spell at least through Tier 3 and 4. 

My newest idea to help the Ranger is to introduce a summon like the Artificer's Homunculus or the Paladin's Steed.  The sticking point is it can't overshadow Summon Beast or the Beastmaster. But the conclusion I kept coming up with is a permanent summon like Homunc or Steed makes perfect sense on a Ranger and it can be introduced just by introducing a 2nd level spell.  You don't need to add a feature to do it.  Since they can change their spells every day that creates the opportunity to take it cast it and then take something else and still have the companion with you.

The Parameters for its power to avoid being more powerful than the Beast or Beastmaster Pet is simple. It can't be good at doing damage in combat.  So what can it do?  Well it could be like a familiar for exploration, maybe give it some extra senses for fun (darkvision, blindsight).   You could also give it a few more HP to allow it to not be murdered by a stiff breeze.  You could give it some once a day powers like the phantom steed (Go for the Eyes - attack that blinds, and My life for you - intercepts an attack's damage).  Giving the Arty and Pally pets and the Ranger none makes no sense. 

Quote from Elfdope >>

My newest idea to help the Ranger is to introduce a summon like the Artificer's Homunculus or the Paladin's Steed.  The sticking point is it can't overshadow Summon Beast or the Beastmaster. But the conclusion I kept coming up with is a permanent summon like Homunc or Steed makes perfect sense on a Ranger and it can be introduced just by introducing a 2nd level spell.  You don't need to add a feature to do it.  Since they can change their spells every day that creates the opportunity to take it cast it and then take something else and still have the companion with you.

The Parameters for its power to avoid being more powerful than the Beast or Beastmaster Pet is simple. It can't be good at doing damage in combat.  So what can it do?  Well it could be like a familiar for exploration, maybe give it some extra senses for fun (darkvision, blindsight).   You could also give it a few more HP to allow it to not be murdered by a stiff breeze.  You could give it some once a day powers like the phantom steed (Go for the Eyes - attack that blinds, and My life for you - intercepts an attack's damage).  Giving the Arty and Pally pets and the Ranger none makes no sense. 

You could just give Ranger Find Familiar. Paladin gets Find Steed at level 5 while Ranger gets nothing, so just toss it in there and maybe let the Ranger cast it using Hunter's Mark charges to forgo the material cost, similar to how Druid can do it. Restrict them to only summoning their familiar as a fey, and it fits perfectly.

This gives Ranger, the exploration class, one of the strongest scouting features in the game. It's thematically flavorful. It also gives non-Beastmaster rangers the option to have an animal companion to liven up their roleplay, or let Beastmasters have a second, smaller companion so they can better embody Daar the Beastmaster, Rexxar, or Garruk. A lot of iconic beastmasters in media have more than one animal friend.

Yep.  You get the idea.  The thought on making it Find Familiar+ is that would allow it to be closer in power to the Steed and the Homunc.  Also by making it 2nd level spell strong you can allow the player to opt in to the pet and requires no change to the existing class.  Its one of the things I noticed in the artificer class design.  Artificer is a stealth pet class because while it doesn't get a feature it does get a class specific spell. 
The advantages of this approach is that you don't need to alter the class or just give it to a subclass which would disrupt the power balance.  Instead simply adding a spell allows the designers to improve the Ranger and address a design complaint.  For those who don't want a pet, they don't have to have one.  It's their choice.
Design wise the problem is it can't be as strong as the beastmaster beast or summon beast.  That limitation really boxes you in, and its frankly annoying.  Because when you look at the Steed or the Homunc and try to make a pet it ends up looking VERY similar to summon beast but lasting all day.  It also ends up scarily equal to the Beastmaster companion in power.  Then you get mad because the Ranger got the short end of the stick.

Another consideration is the fact that Summon Beast is a concentration spell. So a ranger who casts it is locked out of using Hunter's Mark... and Relentless Hunter... and Precise Hunter... and Foe Slayer. 

Exactly.  THe solution can't be free Summon Beast's x per day.  It's concentration, and if its not concentration it presents different balance issues.  So the new spell has to be a non-concentration spell like find familiar but worthy of a second level spell.  It can't be stronger offensively than Summon Beast either, so it has to be different.

The two reactions I had prepared were usable 1x/day:
My life for you, the beast takes a reaction and interecepts an attack that hits you taking all the damage.
Go for the eyes, The beast springs and attacks causing minimal damage and the blinded condition

Since we're steering toward homebrew territory, I'd start by addressing the purpose behind the spell. Sure, Find Familiar is a great starting point. So simply adding it to the Ranger spell list is an option. We could even go so far as to give the ranger one free casting per day without using a spell slot. But I don't see combat as being the main purpose behind using that spell. I think it fits better with the scouting & spying aspect of the ranger. But for that to be effective, we would have to drastically increase the range of Find Familiar. As is, the caster can only maintain visual and telepathic connection to the familiar within a 100 foot range. That's fine indoors or underground, but out in the wilderness 100 feet ain't much.

So adding the Find Familiar spell to the ranger list, with perhaps a range increase if cast outdoors, solves most of the problem. And as far as combat effectiveness, it could provide the ranger with advantage on attacks against one target per round by incorporating the (optional) flanking function. So the familiar itself isn't doing any damage, but it's allowing the ranger to use Hunter's Mark, and giving advantage on attacks, which is pretty sweet. And heck if the ranger dips a level or three into Rogue, that's an easy Sneak Attack every round!

So it's a nice little buff, and it's balanced by the fact that the familiar will be one-shotted by the first hit. And heck, if you really want to go hog wild the ranger could cast Find Familiar and Summon Beast in the same fight, track and attack the enemy from two different directions, with advantage! So it's not competing with Summon Beast, it's enhancing it! 

Did anyone address the fact that Find Familiar is a 60 minute cast?

So you cast it during a rest period. And you can use an action to send it to a pocket dimension, and use an action to summon it back. So really it's an action, at least until the familiar gets killed. 

Quote from AnzioFaro >>

So you cast it during a rest period. And you can use an action to send it to a pocket dimension, and use an action to summon it back. So really it's an action, at least until the familiar gets killed.

Sure, I'm just pointing out that a range increase is a nothingburger of an improvement because it really can't be combat cast anyway. Not unless you want to give them the Druid 2 ability to cast it as an action without components.

This was what I had sketched out:
Level 2 spell, 10 minute casting time.
10 HP (5 per spell level), AC11+Spell level (starts at 2).
Climb/walking speed 30 40.
Exploration tools like a familiar BUT it uses your skill rolls not its stat block.
No delivering touch spells, but I have pondered allowing it to deliver goodberries
2 states, on person (can't be damaged/targeted like an object but can't help) or out on its own where its a viable target.
Acts on your initiative.
Dodges unless ordered otherwise
3 actions/reactions it can take x times per day
Go for the Eyes - Blinds
My LIfe for You - Eats the damage from an incoming attack (likely dies)
Distract horribly - Eats their action except to attack it (likely dies)

I could see expanding the range.  Wanted casting to take a while, but better than the 1 hour time of find familiar.  My thought is it helps bring up the Ranger a little in mid level power and provides a pet to a class that begs for a pet but does so in a way that is optional.  It further expands the Ranger as a great scout.  The actions/reactions of the pet are really designed to assist the Ranger but not make it overly powerful.  The Ranger is almost overly strong levels 1-4 and is on par 5-8.  You can't add much without tilting things too far in their favor.
The weakness then really comes at level 10+.  This would not fix that and I don't think a new overpowered level 3-5 spell is the right option.

You're failing to recognize that Hunter's Mark is being shoe-horned in as a class feature. If you don't use HM, you're wasting a class feature. However, if you do use it, you're using up your bonus action and concentration, which precludes you from using other spells. Not wasting your class feature means burning parts of your action economy. It's a bad feature. The fact that you can cast it for free several times does not make it any less bad. No other class does this. A Paladin does not have a feature that compels you to use Divine Smite, but it's very strong and worth using as much as possible. The Warlock's signature spell is Eldritch Blast, but they aren't forced to invest in it at all. The Ranger is the only one who makes a class feature around one single spell. And yeah, eventually, the spell is overshadowed at level 9, which means it's a dead feature by then. The Ranger is absolutely being built around Hunter's Mark.

Quote from Greevar >>

You're failing to recognize that Hunter's Mark is being shoe-horned in as a class feature. If you don't use HM, you're wasting a class feature. However, if you do use it, you're using up your bonus action and concentration, which precludes you from using other spells. Not wasting your class feature means burning parts of your action economy. It's a bad feature. The fact that you can cast it for free several times does not make it any less bad. No other class does this. A Paladin does not have a feature that compels you to use Divine Smite, but it's very strong and worth using as much as possible. The Warlock's signature spell is Eldritch Blast, but they aren't forced to invest in it at all. The Ranger is the only one who makes a class feature around one single spell. And yeah, eventually, the spell is overshadowed at level 9, which means it's a dead feature by then. The Ranger is absolutely being built around Hunter's Mark.

A class feature is only wasted if it's not used when appropriate for the situation and Hunter's Mark is not appropriate for all situations. When you want cheap and easy single target damage enhancement for your attacks, use Hunter's Mark. In other situations, use other tools. Trying to make HM the solution to every problem is silly. I've used Hunter's Mark on my Beast Master all of twice and I don't feel bad about it at all.

Quote from Ophidimancer >>

Quote from Greevar >>

You're failing to recognize that Hunter's Mark is being shoe-horned in as a class feature. If you don't use HM, you're wasting a class feature. However, if you do use it, you're using up your bonus action and concentration, which precludes you from using other spells. Not wasting your class feature means burning parts of your action economy. It's a bad feature. The fact that you can cast it for free several times does not make it any less bad. No other class does this. A Paladin does not have a feature that compels you to use Divine Smite, but it's very strong and worth using as much as possible. The Warlock's signature spell is Eldritch Blast, but they aren't forced to invest in it at all. The Ranger is the only one who makes a class feature around one single spell. And yeah, eventually, the spell is overshadowed at level 9, which means it's a dead feature by then. The Ranger is absolutely being built around Hunter's Mark.

A class feature is only wasted if it's not used when appropriate for the situation and Hunter's Mark is not appropriate for all situations. When you want cheap and easy single target damage enhancement for your attacks, use Hunter's Mark. In other situations, use other tools. Trying to make HM the solution to every problem is silly. I've used Hunter's Mark on my Beast Master all of twice and I don't feel bad about it at all.

 Perhaps not, but the Ranger would be better served if it had other class features that were not useless when the Ranger was not using Hunter's Mark.

Quote from Sequilonis >>

Quote from Ophidimancer >>

Quote from Greevar >>

You're failing to recognize that Hunter's Mark is being shoe-horned in as a class feature. If you don't use HM, you're wasting a class feature. However, if you do use it, you're using up your bonus action and concentration, which precludes you from using other spells. Not wasting your class feature means burning parts of your action economy. It's a bad feature. The fact that you can cast it for free several times does not make it any less bad. No other class does this. A Paladin does not have a feature that compels you to use Divine Smite, but it's very strong and worth using as much as possible. The Warlock's signature spell is Eldritch Blast, but they aren't forced to invest in it at all. The Ranger is the only one who makes a class feature around one single spell. And yeah, eventually, the spell is overshadowed at level 9, which means it's a dead feature by then. The Ranger is absolutely being built around Hunter's Mark.

A class feature is only wasted if it's not used when appropriate for the situation and Hunter's Mark is not appropriate for all situations. When you want cheap and easy single target damage enhancement for your attacks, use Hunter's Mark. In other situations, use other tools. Trying to make HM the solution to every problem is silly. I've used Hunter's Mark on my Beast Master all of twice and I don't feel bad about it at all.

 Perhaps not, but the Ranger would be better served if it had other class features that were not useless when the Ranger was not using Hunter's Mark.

Well I can't argue with that, since "better served" is a big ol hypothetical that is neither here nor there. What I can say is that Ranger '24 plays really quite well in actual play.

Quote from Sequilonis >>

Quote from Ophidimancer >>

A class feature is only wasted if it's not used when appropriate for the situation and Hunter's Mark is not appropriate for all situations. When you want cheap and easy single target damage enhancement for your attacks, use Hunter's Mark. In other situations, use other tools. Trying to make HM the solution to every problem is silly. I've used Hunter's Mark on my Beast Master all of twice and I don't feel bad about it at all.

 Perhaps not, but the Ranger would be better served if it had other class features that were not useless when the Ranger was not using Hunter's Mark.

 What kind of game are you playing where the ranger is constantly hobbled? I have a druid, fighter, ranger, and a sorcerer playing in mine. The ranger is outperforming them all in combat except when the druid pulls out the stops, and the ranger is absolutely essential out of combat in my Call of the Netherdeep campaign. The ranger hits reliably and their damage, while not spectacular per hit, is consistent and that adds up over the entire combat. I am fairly certain without their exploration skills, even in the urban environment they are currently in, the party would be experiencing a dramatically different game without the ranger.