No, the 2024 ranger isn’t the perfect ranger we all hoped for. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t a good ranger. It incorporates much of the changes from Tasha’s which means it isn’t a horrible ranger. I don’t know what the video was sayings as I could only stand to watch about 1 minute of it the things that folks seem to be complaining the most about are: 1) the loss of the various “Ranger ribbons” that gave it a lot of “flavor”. 2) the reliance on hunter’s mark for many core features. 3) the underwhelming capstone feature. 4) an unstated problem - as a Gish the ranger is “ neither fish nor fowl nor good red meat” ie it’s not an easy to play one dimensional class and so it can be easy to play/DM it badly destroying the experience of an otherwise great class.
all of the above are fairly legitimate complaints, none are so severe as to make it a useless class - even the entire set of complaints isn’t really that bad. 1) many of the ribbons were of , at best, marginal use other than in overland travel/exploration. Sadly this aspect of the game has nearly disappeared so their loss is not a major loss in reality. Further, many of those ribbons are effectively covered by expertise in nature and/or survival along with good and knowledgeable play/DMing. When they revise it ( again, and they will as enough of us are clearly unsatisfied with this iteration) they will hopefully bring back some ribbons and strengthen the overland travel/exploration leg. Hopefully the revision will also grant 2 expertises not 1 at L2. 2) hunter’s mark, as this is now a core of the class I don’t see it being changed in any revisions. It’s actually not that bad just that annoying. Its main problem is that as a concentration spell/ability it limits interactions. Much of this on purpose to limit overpowering combos with other concentration spells - a balance issue. As such I don’t see much hope for change. Given the free activations losing it due to concentration loss isn’t a major ( only a minor) problem. You get it for free and it doesn’t count against the spells known and that is actually a big help to diversified spell casting. 3) The capstone, given how infrequently games actually go to L20 this is really mostly a bi*ch point for white room theorizers. However it’s a valid complaint, it is a very weak capstone. Adding it to a well explained 2014 capstone ( you get your wisdom bonus as addition to both your “to hit” and “damage” rolls would be a much better one, getting that for all attacks not just one would be even better. 4) poor player/DM skill - not much any of us can really do here. My personal experience is that those who are skilled in outdoor activities get and allow more here than those that aren’t. Being able to provide real world experiences and outside resources ( the Boy Scout handbook isn’t a bad starter here) can help a player work with a DM when done politely. But there is no real solution for this problem other than us all recognizing it exists and discounting some of the complaints based on it.
like all classes the ranger develops over its growth. The additional problem the ranger player faces is that the ranger doesn’t just grow stronger in its initial abilities like most classes. It evolves from a martial first, magic second Gish in tier 1 to a magic first, martial second Gish by tier 3. Trying to play it as martial first at higher levels can be disappointing for those that don’t recognize this evolution of the class. This has changed somewhat as the summon/conjure spells have been changed to bring forth either a single entity or a pack tith a single attack/damage (stronger but only 1) . Play test will be needed to see how these compare to the 2014 versions. Meanwhile the general improvements to martials and two weapon fighting have clearly improved the rangers abilities there making it a more powerful martial if played correctly.
All together, while the 2024 ranger isn’t the “perfect” ranger we all wanted ( probably doesn’t exist as too many different things are wanted) it is a decent and playable version. Most of its problems can be managed by good and knowledgeable play by the player and DM. For improvements we will sadly have to wait for the next revision ( probably around 2029) .
No, the 2024 ranger isn’t the perfect ranger we all hoped for. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t a good ranger. It incorporates much of the changes from Tasha’s which means it isn’t a horrible ranger. I don’t know what the video was sayings as I could only stand to watch about 1 minute of it the things that folks seem to be complaining the most about are: 1) the loss of the various “Ranger ribbons” that gave it a lot of “flavor”. 2) the reliance on hunter’s mark for many core features. 3) the underwhelming capstone feature. 4) an unstated problem - as a Gish the ranger is “ neither fish nor fowl nor good red meat” ie it’s not an easy to play one dimensional class and so it can be easy to play/DM it badly destroying the experience of an otherwise great class.
all of the above are fairly legitimate complaints, none are so severe as to make it a useless class - even the entire set of complaints isn’t really that bad. 1) many of the ribbons were of , at best, marginal use other than in overland travel/exploration. Sadly this aspect of the game has nearly disappeared so their loss is not a major loss in reality. Further, many of those ribbons are effectively covered by expertise in nature and/or survival along with good and knowledgeable play/DMing. When they revise it ( again, and they will as enough of us are clearly unsatisfied with this iteration) they will hopefully bring back some ribbons and strengthen the overland travel/exploration leg. Hopefully the revision will also grant 2 expertises not 1 at L2. 2) hunter’s mark, as this is now a core of the class I don’t see it being changed in any revisions. It’s actually not that bad just that annoying. Its main problem is that as a concentration spell/ability it limits interactions. Much of this on purpose to limit overpowering combos with other concentration spells - a balance issue. As such I don’t see much hope for change. Given the free activations losing it due to concentration loss isn’t a major ( only a minor) problem. You get it for free and it doesn’t count against the spells known and that is actually a big help to diversified spell casting. 3) The capstone, given how infrequently games actually go to L20 this is really mostly a bi*ch point for white room theorizers. However it’s a valid complaint, it is a very weak capstone. Adding it to a well explained 2014 capstone ( you get your wisdom bonus as addition to both your “to hit” and “damage” rolls would be a much better one, getting that for all attacks not just one would be even better. 4) poor player/DM skill - not much any of us can really do here. My personal experience is that those who are skilled in outdoor activities get and allow more here than those that aren’t. Being able to provide real world experiences and outside resources ( the Boy Scout handbook isn’t a bad starter here) can help a player work with a DM when done politely. But there is no real solution for this problem other than us all recognizing it exists and discounting some of the complaints based on it.
like all classes the ranger develops over its growth. The additional problem the ranger player faces is that the ranger doesn’t just grow stronger in its initial abilities like most classes. It evolves from a martial first, magic second Gish in tier 1 to a magic first, martial second Gish by tier 3. Trying to play it as martial first at higher levels can be disappointing for those that don’t recognize this evolution of the class. This has changed somewhat as the summon/conjure spells have been changed to bring forth either a single entity or a pack tith a single attack/damage (stronger but only 1) . Play test will be needed to see how these compare to the 2014 versions. Meanwhile the general improvements to martials and two weapon fighting have clearly improved the rangers abilities there making it a more powerful martial if played correctly.
All together, while the 2024 ranger isn’t the “perfect” ranger we all wanted ( probably doesn’t exist as too many different things are wanted) it is a decent and playable version. Most of its problems can be managed by good and knowledgeable play by the player and DM. For improvements we will sadly have to wait for the next revision ( probably around 2029) .
Well said. I have a 5th level Ranger and gave it a lot of Druid/Fey flavor. Magic Initiate (druid) origin feat, Druid Warrior Fighting style gives him 4 druid cantrips (I chose Druidcraft,message, produce flame and shillelagh) plus a first level Druid spell (I took cure wounds) that doesn't require a spell slot. With the Fey-touched feat I added command (not otherwise available to a ranger) plus he gets misty step - again useable once per long rest without a spell slot. I just leaned into the importance of hunter's mark. 3 castings of H.M. without a slot per long rest and with the Hunter Subclass (Hunter's Lore and Hunter's prey are pretty nice features for doing extra damage) and that leaves all his spell slots open for other things like hail of thorns if he's using his bow in combat or for other things out of combat.
"...at worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
My biggest issue with Ranger is that WOTC have shown they can do great Class individuality, Monk is a great example of a class that just feels much more flavoursom.
In addition other classes have a higher level ability that alllows spells to be used for free, or (I might be misremembering here and don't have the book to hand) without concentration, I think Spiritual weapon is an example. So it would not have been a stretch to allow the Ranger to cast Hunters mark for free a number of times equal to Wisdom bonus lasting a minute each cast ending if the character becomes incapacitated or dies (as per the description for other spells like this)
The flavour stuff is stripped out, with WOTC seemign to think that giving more spell casting counters it, it doesn't, I get what your saying about "experienced DM's" being able to work around this (and I will indeed do this), but, the players handbook and the game as a whole should not be aimed at experienced DM's/players WOTC have basically leant into making a Combat engine, they have stripped back on the exploration and roleplay elements of both the Backgrounds and the Classes and turned them into a set of mechanical rules to be used, geenrally in combat (if you go through in general there arefar fewer non combat abilities through the whole rule set).
I think Ranger emphasise this because the combat aspect is def weaker then other classes, and so all that lost flavour has been picked up on by those of us who play 2014 because it helped make the ranger class stand out in terms of RP.
I think new players will come in, look at a ranger and from this wonder, why, what makes a ranger stand out from playing a different class. What will make a new player think it is a viable option to take?
New player will not be able to see that it is not a viable class ("later") option. They will see thats it a jack of all trade. But not good anywhere. Its a trap. One dip is awesome Lvling it till 5 is okish. Rest is absolutely without identity. how the **** hunter mark is supposed to give identity, eldritch blast was the most boring shit ever on warlock. Spell variation and leverage, like I'm more an ensnaring type of ranger or I'm more an hail of thorn ranger, would be great if it had variation. There is like 4 ranger spell. Most of them ranged only, while ranger is not supposed to be restricted to ranged only. Thx there is zephyr strike that save the class. Pal got got inbuilt battlemanoeuver, and other pal only spell. :) The way you prefer to play your class gives it character, if there is only one way, this is not a class, its not even a subclass, its just one homebrewed character class.
Well I retired my Ranger at lvl 12. It was fun to play. I ended up using a long bow more than dual wielding scimitars. I did alright as a scout, trap finder, and trap neutralizer. (We did not have a Rogue). We did not really do much with outdoors things. We had a few encounters but nothing campaign worthy. Beast Master was a blast and the high light of the character which it should be, IMHO. I did quite a bit of healing with cure wounds.
My feeling is that I was more of a Cleric/Rogue than a Nature Warrior. It did not matter because we did not have long campaigns that depended on outside encounters. I used my expertise on typically Rogue skills like stealth and sleigh of hands (for traps). The few times we did not have rations, I used Goodberry instead of a skill in hunting for animals to eat.
This one of the problems really, the wilderness exploration leg is on life support and ranger is losing its identity with that. What is needed. ( I think) are a couple of well written travel/exploration of the wilderness adventures. The problem is the writers have to know about wilderness survival etc in order to write the stories and then the ranger layers and DMs need to to know a decent amount as well to play them out. They also need to keep track of missiles, encumbrances, material components, food etc and most folks today don’t have the knowledge, skills or interest. So the ranger is losing flavor and morphing into a general Gish chassis. I wouldn’t be surprised to see it revert to something similar to the 1 e ranger - a fighter subclass with access to Druid and arcane magic at upper levels.
This one of the problems really, the wilderness exploration leg is on life support and ranger is losing its identity with that. What is needed. ( I think) are a couple of well written travel/exploration of the wilderness adventures. The problem is the writers have to know about wilderness survival etc in order to write the stories and then the ranger layers and DMs need to to know a decent amount as well to play them out. They also need to keep track of missiles, encumbrances, material components, food etc and most folks today don’t have the knowledge, skills or interest. So the ranger is losing flavor and morphing into a general Gish chassis. I wouldn’t be surprised to see it revert to something similar to the 1 e ranger - a fighter subclass with access to Druid and arcane magic at upper levels.
You're not wrong. in my 2e days we tracked everything. Rations, ammo, etc. Now? Not a single person in my group is interested in tracking that stuff. The only material components we worry about are expensive ones consumed in the casting. tracking that stuff just isn't fun.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Crzyhawk, your right that for many players it’s not fun. For many adventures it’s not needed either. But for wilderness exploration it’s almost essential simply to get the right feel for the adventure. You have limited resources and have to work accordingly. Done well however, it can be presented as a challenge and having rangers as party members greatly improves your odds. The other thing hurting rangers is that anyone can roll for any skill whether you have that skill or not. Yes it lets everyone try but it basically renders the rangers skills if not useless, at least reduced in importance along with the bard’s jack of all trades and the rogue’s reliable talent.
There are plenty of ways to make the exploration features of 2014 work at tabels that don't enjoy traveling or survival scenarios. This is not to say fixes were needed for 2024 but rather show that they weren't given fair shot at fixing what player fantasy it appeals to.
Skipped traveling sequences often gave a 2014 ranger downtime that other classes didn't get. The "related to " and "recalling" bits allowed unique non exploration uses of advantage or expertise (sometimes stacked).
I once used both favored terrain and favored enemy to impress guests at a party because of my unique dishes.
Most people who just treat "ribbons" as expected gameplay elements will find a use for such features and get way more enjoyment out of the class. You don't even need pillars of play just playing to your features will naturally create a table balance. The 14 features are really written to allow such self adjustment at the table.
Crzyhawk, your right that for many players it’s not fun. For many adventures it’s not needed either. But for wilderness exploration it’s almost essential simply to get the right feel for the adventure. You have limited resources and have to work accordingly. Done well however, it can be presented as a challenge and having rangers as party members greatly improves your odds. The other thing hurting rangers is that anyone can roll for any skill whether you have that skill or not. Yes it lets everyone try but it basically renders the rangers skills if not useless, at least reduced in importance along with the bard’s jack of all trades and the rogue’s reliable talent.
While I agree, I think that forcing to do people to do things they don't enjoy, justy so rangers can feel rangery, is kinda bad.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Crzyhawk, your right that for many players it’s not fun. For many adventures it’s not needed either. But for wilderness exploration it’s almost essential simply to get the right feel for the adventure. You have limited resources and have to work accordingly. Done well however, it can be presented as a challenge and having rangers as party members greatly improves your odds. The other thing hurting rangers is that anyone can roll for any skill whether you have that skill or not. Yes it lets everyone try but it basically renders the rangers skills if not useless, at least reduced in importance along with the bard’s jack of all trades and the rogue’s reliable talent.
While I agree, I think that forcing to do people to do things they don't enjoy, justy so rangers can feel rangery, is kinda bad.
Its a playstyle, - Some DMs and groups will track encumbrance, ammo, rations, spell components and every copper piece, and spellbook page available (I do even on campaings that don't matter because I learned to play that way back in 2e and 3.5ed). - Others don't because is boring or to much of a hassle.
To each its own and you don't actually need that to enjoy exploration to its fullest, but it needs the DM and players to give in to that part. Even on the simplest of one-shots were you go from one scene to the next fast because of "Real Life Time Constraints"... if people put its 2cents you can do exploration right.
A character can be played with many different combination of skills and builds. And you need to play your characters strengths for them to apply, finding ways to bring it forth in gameplay or talk to your DM about.
Well I retired my Ranger at lvl 12. It was fun to play. I ended up using a long bow more than dual wielding scimitars. I did alright as a scout, trap finder, and trap neutralizer. (We did not have a Rogue). We did not really do much with outdoors things. We had a few encounters but nothing campaign worthy. Beast Master was a blast and the high light of the character which it should be, IMHO. I did quite a bit of healing with cure wounds.
My feeling is that I was more of a Cleric/Rogue than a Nature Warrior. It did not matter because we did not have long campaigns that depended on outside encounters. I used my expertise on typically Rogue skills like stealth and sleigh of hands (for traps). The few times we did not have rations, I used Goodberry instead of a skill in hunting for animals to eat.
This is why I love ranger so much... in a given party it can cover some or add to a missing or important role with ease (more healing always is good), and adapt easily. The roguish part can be covered with a background for sure (criminal, sleight of hands and thief tools), but its not to difficult to do as a ranger, and you can put your expertise there to help also, wich not many can say (Bard, rogue and ranger are the only expert classes).
I’m playing a 2024 Dearf Ranger in Strahd right now. We reached level 3 in the end of the last session, I didn’t decide yet which sub I will go; leaning towards Beastmaster.
From levels 1 and 2 during Death House, my character was the powerhouse MVP of the party mainly because I was dishing out serious damage with TWF + Hunters Mark, and providing really good support to the my allies through Goodberry and the newly boosted Cure Wounds.
I agree that the class as a whole doesn’t have any new and innovative capability; it’s a consolidated Tasha’s revision, which is ok. Nick weapon mastery has been the greatest add so far. I had bigger expectations to my favorite class, but mechanically speaking, it’s quite reliable.
I think you will see it drops off a bit in t2 and 3
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I think it will depend on equipment. I played my Beast Master Archer Ranger to level 12. I managed to get a +1 bow, +2 studded leather, and a lot of low level healing potions. We were not playing with a lot of permanent magic items. That is were my actual experience ends. But some brief theory crafting: add a couple of +3 weapons and armor, some of the newer magic items that should be artifacts but for some reason are not, You could play to tier 4. With the right equipment you could easily take on a 630 hit point CR30 single monster and kill it all by your self in less than or equal to 20 turns. Add in your team and it is even quicker.
For a Beast Master resistance or immunity to Force damage and slashing damage are your biggest problems. At higher levels your beast can do Force damage and 2 attacks. So two +3 scimitars gets you three attacks with Nick and you use your bonus attack to get your Beast to attack twice and you are doing some serious damage. Stack on Hunter's Mark that is much harder to break concentration as well.
It's more like it just doesn't take off like fighters, barbarians, and paladins. It does pick up somewhat in Tier 4 with the advantage and the d10, but at least with single target damage, the ranger does the poorest of all martials in Tier 3 and 4.
It's more like it just doesn't take off like fighters, barbarians, and paladins. It does pick up somewhat in Tier 4 with the advantage and the d10, but at least with single target damage, the ranger does the poorest of all martials in Tier 3 and 4.
^^ this. It lacks the extra attack of fighters, the direct damage spells of paladins, and the straight out extra damage of barbarians.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Yeah, as you transition out of tiers 1&2 the ranger transitions from being a martial first, caster second to being a caster first and martial second. The problem there is that they changed all the summoning/ conjuring spells that gave the ranger’s casting its power. Now they all bring in one creature or effect making them less effective as well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
No, the 2024 ranger isn’t the perfect ranger we all hoped for. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t a good ranger. It incorporates much of the changes from Tasha’s which means it isn’t a horrible ranger. I don’t know what the video was sayings as I could only stand to watch about 1 minute of it the things that folks seem to be complaining the most about are:
1) the loss of the various “Ranger ribbons” that gave it a lot of “flavor”.
2) the reliance on hunter’s mark for many core features.
3) the underwhelming capstone feature.
4) an unstated problem - as a Gish the ranger is “ neither fish nor fowl nor good red meat” ie it’s not an easy to play one dimensional class and so it can be easy to play/DM it badly destroying the experience of an otherwise great class.
all of the above are fairly legitimate complaints, none are so severe as to make it a useless class - even the entire set of complaints isn’t really that bad.
1) many of the ribbons were of , at best, marginal use other than in overland travel/exploration. Sadly this aspect of the game has nearly disappeared so their loss is not a major loss in reality. Further, many of those ribbons are effectively covered by expertise in nature and/or survival along with good and knowledgeable play/DMing. When they revise it ( again, and they will as enough of us are clearly unsatisfied with this iteration) they will hopefully bring back some ribbons and strengthen the overland travel/exploration leg. Hopefully the revision will also grant 2 expertises not 1 at L2.
2) hunter’s mark, as this is now a core of the class I don’t see it being changed in any revisions. It’s actually not that bad just that annoying. Its main problem is that as a concentration spell/ability it limits interactions. Much of this on purpose to limit overpowering combos with other concentration spells - a balance issue. As such I don’t see much hope for change. Given the free activations losing it due to concentration loss isn’t a major ( only a minor) problem. You get it for free and it doesn’t count against the spells known and that is actually a big help to diversified spell casting.
3) The capstone, given how infrequently games actually go to L20 this is really mostly a bi*ch point for white room theorizers. However it’s a valid complaint, it is a very weak capstone. Adding it to a well explained 2014 capstone ( you get your wisdom bonus as addition to both your “to hit” and “damage” rolls would be a much better one, getting that for all attacks not just one would be even better.
4) poor player/DM skill - not much any of us can really do here. My personal experience is that those who are skilled in outdoor activities get and allow more here than those that aren’t. Being able to provide real world experiences and outside resources ( the Boy Scout handbook isn’t a bad starter here) can help a player work with a DM when done politely. But there is no real solution for this problem other than us all recognizing it exists and discounting some of the complaints based on it.
like all classes the ranger develops over its growth. The additional problem the ranger player faces is that the ranger doesn’t just grow stronger in its initial abilities like most classes. It evolves from a martial first, magic second Gish in tier 1 to a magic first, martial second Gish by tier 3. Trying to play it as martial first at higher levels can be disappointing for those that don’t recognize this evolution of the class. This has changed somewhat as the summon/conjure spells have been changed to bring forth either a single entity or a pack tith a single attack/damage (stronger but only 1) . Play test will be needed to see how these compare to the 2014 versions.
Meanwhile the general improvements to martials and two weapon fighting have clearly improved the rangers abilities there making it a more powerful martial if played correctly.
All together, while the 2024 ranger isn’t the “perfect” ranger we all wanted ( probably doesn’t exist as too many different things are wanted) it is a decent and playable version. Most of its problems can be managed by good and knowledgeable play by the player and DM. For improvements we will sadly have to wait for the next revision ( probably around 2029) .
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Well said. I have a 5th level Ranger and gave it a lot of Druid/Fey flavor. Magic Initiate (druid) origin feat, Druid Warrior Fighting style gives him 4 druid cantrips (I chose Druidcraft,message, produce flame and shillelagh) plus a first level Druid spell (I took cure wounds) that doesn't require a spell slot. With the Fey-touched feat I added command (not otherwise available to a ranger) plus he gets misty step - again useable once per long rest without a spell slot. I just leaned into the importance of hunter's mark. 3 castings of H.M. without a slot per long rest and with the Hunter Subclass (Hunter's Lore and Hunter's prey are pretty nice features for doing extra damage) and that leaves all his spell slots open for other things like hail of thorns if he's using his bow in combat or for other things out of combat.
"...at worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
My biggest issue with Ranger is that WOTC have shown they can do great Class individuality, Monk is a great example of a class that just feels much more flavoursom.
In addition other classes have a higher level ability that alllows spells to be used for free, or (I might be misremembering here and don't have the book to hand) without concentration, I think Spiritual weapon is an example. So it would not have been a stretch to allow the Ranger to cast Hunters mark for free a number of times equal to Wisdom bonus lasting a minute each cast ending if the character becomes incapacitated or dies (as per the description for other spells like this)
The flavour stuff is stripped out, with WOTC seemign to think that giving more spell casting counters it, it doesn't, I get what your saying about "experienced DM's" being able to work around this (and I will indeed do this), but, the players handbook and the game as a whole should not be aimed at experienced DM's/players WOTC have basically leant into making a Combat engine, they have stripped back on the exploration and roleplay elements of both the Backgrounds and the Classes and turned them into a set of mechanical rules to be used, geenrally in combat (if you go through in general there arefar fewer non combat abilities through the whole rule set).
I think Ranger emphasise this because the combat aspect is def weaker then other classes, and so all that lost flavour has been picked up on by those of us who play 2014 because it helped make the ranger class stand out in terms of RP.
I think new players will come in, look at a ranger and from this wonder, why, what makes a ranger stand out from playing a different class. What will make a new player think it is a viable option to take?
New player will not be able to see that it is not a viable class ("later") option. They will see thats it a jack of all trade. But not good anywhere. Its a trap.
One dip is awesome
Lvling it till 5 is okish.
Rest is absolutely without identity. how the **** hunter mark is supposed to give identity, eldritch blast was the most boring shit ever on warlock.
Spell variation and leverage, like I'm more an ensnaring type of ranger or I'm more an hail of thorn ranger, would be great if it had variation. There is like 4 ranger spell. Most of them ranged only, while ranger is not supposed to be restricted to ranged only. Thx there is zephyr strike that save the class.
Pal got got inbuilt battlemanoeuver, and other pal only spell. :)
The way you prefer to play your class gives it character, if there is only one way, this is not a class, its not even a subclass, its just one homebrewed character class.
Well I retired my Ranger at lvl 12. It was fun to play. I ended up using a long bow more than dual wielding scimitars. I did alright as a scout, trap finder, and trap neutralizer. (We did not have a Rogue). We did not really do much with outdoors things. We had a few encounters but nothing campaign worthy. Beast Master was a blast and the high light of the character which it should be, IMHO. I did quite a bit of healing with cure wounds.
My feeling is that I was more of a Cleric/Rogue than a Nature Warrior. It did not matter because we did not have long campaigns that depended on outside encounters. I used my expertise on typically Rogue skills like stealth and sleigh of hands (for traps). The few times we did not have rations, I used Goodberry instead of a skill in hunting for animals to eat.
This one of the problems really, the wilderness exploration leg is on life support and ranger is losing its identity with that. What is needed. ( I think) are a couple of well written travel/exploration of the wilderness adventures. The problem is the writers have to know about wilderness survival etc in order to write the stories and then the ranger layers and DMs need to to know a decent amount as well to play them out. They also need to keep track of missiles, encumbrances, material components, food etc and most folks today don’t have the knowledge, skills or interest. So the ranger is losing flavor and morphing into a general Gish chassis. I wouldn’t be surprised to see it revert to something similar to the 1 e ranger - a fighter subclass with access to Druid and arcane magic at upper levels.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
You're not wrong. in my 2e days we tracked everything. Rations, ammo, etc. Now? Not a single person in my group is interested in tracking that stuff. The only material components we worry about are expensive ones consumed in the casting. tracking that stuff just isn't fun.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Five minutes of funny Ranger stuff! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKJJfY7i7O4
Crzyhawk, your right that for many players it’s not fun. For many adventures it’s not needed either. But for wilderness exploration it’s almost essential simply to get the right feel for the adventure. You have limited resources and have to work accordingly. Done well however, it can be presented as a challenge and having rangers as party members greatly improves your odds. The other thing hurting rangers is that anyone can roll for any skill whether you have that skill or not. Yes it lets everyone try but it basically renders the rangers skills if not useless, at least reduced in importance along with the bard’s jack of all trades and the rogue’s reliable talent.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
There are plenty of ways to make the exploration features of 2014 work at tabels that don't enjoy traveling or survival scenarios. This is not to say fixes were needed for 2024 but rather show that they weren't given fair shot at fixing what player fantasy it appeals to.
Skipped traveling sequences often gave a 2014 ranger downtime that other classes didn't get. The "related to " and "recalling" bits allowed unique non exploration uses of advantage or expertise (sometimes stacked).
I once used both favored terrain and favored enemy to impress guests at a party because of my unique dishes.
Most people who just treat "ribbons" as expected gameplay elements will find a use for such features and get way more enjoyment out of the class. You don't even need pillars of play just playing to your features will naturally create a table balance. The 14 features are really written to allow such self adjustment at the table.
While I agree, I think that forcing to do people to do things they don't enjoy, justy so rangers can feel rangery, is kinda bad.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Its a playstyle,
- Some DMs and groups will track encumbrance, ammo, rations, spell components and every copper piece, and spellbook page available (I do even on campaings that don't matter because I learned to play that way back in 2e and 3.5ed).
- Others don't because is boring or to much of a hassle.
To each its own and you don't actually need that to enjoy exploration to its fullest, but it needs the DM and players to give in to that part.
Even on the simplest of one-shots were you go from one scene to the next fast because of "Real Life Time Constraints"... if people put its 2cents you can do exploration right.
A character can be played with many different combination of skills and builds. And you need to play your characters strengths for them to apply, finding ways to bring it forth in gameplay or talk to your DM about.
This is why I love ranger so much... in a given party it can cover some or add to a missing or important role with ease (more healing always is good), and adapt easily.
The roguish part can be covered with a background for sure (criminal, sleight of hands and thief tools), but its not to difficult to do as a ranger, and you can put your expertise there to help also, wich not many can say (Bard, rogue and ranger are the only expert classes).
I’m playing a 2024 Dearf Ranger in Strahd right now. We reached level 3 in the end of the last session, I didn’t decide yet which sub I will go; leaning towards Beastmaster.
From levels 1 and 2 during Death House, my character was the powerhouse MVP of the party mainly because I was dishing out serious damage with TWF + Hunters Mark, and providing really good support to the my allies through Goodberry and the newly boosted Cure Wounds.
I agree that the class as a whole doesn’t have any new and innovative capability; it’s a consolidated Tasha’s revision, which is ok. Nick weapon mastery has been the greatest add so far. I had bigger expectations to my favorite class, but mechanically speaking, it’s quite reliable.
I think you will see it drops off a bit in t2 and 3
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
It falls off a cliff in Tier 3.
I think it will depend on equipment. I played my Beast Master Archer Ranger to level 12. I managed to get a +1 bow, +2 studded leather, and a lot of low level healing potions. We were not playing with a lot of permanent magic items. That is were my actual experience ends. But some brief theory crafting: add a couple of +3 weapons and armor, some of the newer magic items that should be artifacts but for some reason are not, You could play to tier 4. With the right equipment you could easily take on a 630 hit point CR30 single monster and kill it all by your self in less than or equal to 20 turns. Add in your team and it is even quicker.
For a Beast Master resistance or immunity to Force damage and slashing damage are your biggest problems. At higher levels your beast can do Force damage and 2 attacks.
So two +3 scimitars gets you three attacks with Nick and you use your bonus attack to get your Beast to attack twice and you are doing some serious damage. Stack on Hunter's Mark that is much harder to break concentration as well.
It's more like it just doesn't take off like fighters, barbarians, and paladins. It does pick up somewhat in Tier 4 with the advantage and the d10, but at least with single target damage, the ranger does the poorest of all martials in Tier 3 and 4.
^^ this. It lacks the extra attack of fighters, the direct damage spells of paladins, and the straight out extra damage of barbarians.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Yeah, as you transition out of tiers 1&2 the ranger transitions from being a martial first, caster second to being a caster first and martial second. The problem there is that they changed all the summoning/ conjuring spells that gave the ranger’s casting its power. Now they all bring in one creature or effect making them less effective as well.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.