Hunter or Monster Slayer

So I've been playing a Ranger in my most recent campaign and can't decide between these two subclasses. Basically the whole character concept is someone who hunts monsters and protects humanity from evil (think witcher/supernatural vibes). He's not meant to be the strongest or have a spell for everything, but through combination of his skills, knowledge, and being well equipped (I spoke with my DM and when we get Down time in game, my character shops around for useful gear and supplies to supplement his lack of magic or overpowered abilities).

Been pretty well rounded so far, able to deal decent damage through typical means, using items he's collected for specific situations, and role play the hell out of a situation. My favorite so far was when he picked up several bottles of 180 proof liquor (90% alcohol) and basically gave the entire enemy camp alcohol poisoning before the party attacked.

Now we're picking subclasses and I'm not sure which makes more sense. Hunter is the more "basic" option and offers more consistent damage, while Monster Slayer has some more magical options for different scenarios. Right now I'm leaning towards Hunter since the damage feels more important than situational spells and abilities that I can only use once or twice per short/long rest or may never come up. I know there is one that lets you trap demons or celestials which is cool, but I have no idea if we'll ever encounter one. Plus, most of the knowledge abilities of Monster Slayer are either obvious or can be gleamed from an ability check.

What do you guys think?

I've only gotten a chance to play one once, but in theorycrafting I always liked Hunter's consistent damage, especially for Colossus Slayer, as an extra 1d8 to an enemy missing hit points is pretty easy to trigger. It's a little better in 2024 when you can switch between Colossus Slayer and Horde Breaker after a short or long rest if you have an idea that you will be more likely to be facing large amounts of weaker enemies and fewer hardy ones.

I played a Monster Slayer to level 20 and loved it. I was one of two highest-damage dealers, and got a lot of use out of OG Natural Explorer and Favored Enemy (which I think generally works better than Favored Foe for PCs in campaigns where you're actively hunting/looking for things, rather than reacting to a situation and need the flexibility of FF). Hunter's Sense was great because it let me know about creatures in disguise -- yes, they look like a dwarf, but they don't have resistance to poison. It's someone in disguise as a dwarf! Why? Not something you can necessarily find out on a regular roll. I found all the abilities useful -- yes, a lot of them are things a full spellcaster will get a lot earlier, but being able to take a little bit off their plate is helpful, and no one expects the Ranger to counter the Wizard's teleport. But that said, it really comes down to the tone of your campaign. But Monster Slayer can deal a lot of damage too, if that's your main concern.

Hi, I have a similar question: i am playing the curse of strahd and am debating which would be most effective for my character's survival and creating damage - hunter or monster slayer?

I would say 2024 Hunter is better than Monster Slayer, which in turn is better then 2014 Hunter. Especially at level 3 (which is the most important one), the 2024 Hunter combines the coolest parts of both subclasses.

This comes down to how you orient yourself in your party's combat strategy.

With the 3rd level damage boosters, Slayer's Prey requires a bonus action while the Hunter's Prey options (Colossus Slayer and Horde Breaker) are added onto an attack without any action cost.  So Monster Slayer seems more suited to focus fire on the boss while Hunter can lean more into skirmishing with mobs and adds.

For the 7th level defensive features, Supernatural Defense is a bonus to saves against attacks from your Slayer's Prey target while the Defensive Tactics options (Multiattack Defense and Escape the Horde) impose disadvantage on attack rolls under their respective circumstances.  It is worth noting all of these apply with no reaction required, they are totally passive defenses.  Supernatural Defense seems more oriented to resisting spell damage and control effects from the main boss (and requires you to have set up Slayer's Prey on it) while the Defensive Tactics mitigates attack roll based damage and/or allows for more mobility around a crowded battlefield (especially nice since it comes on the heels of Roving the level before it).

At 11th level, this trend continues, Monster Slayer gets a 'counter-spell' like ability vs. Hunter applying 'splash damage' to another target nearby (great for being able to pivot to that enemy and immediately qualify to add Colossus Slayer 1d8 the following round).  Note also at this level feature that Monster Slayer is once per rest while Hunter is once per turn as long as there's a qualifying visible target within 30 feet.  At 15th level Monster Slayer gives you a reaction to basically change a spell save into an attack roll for resolution where Hunter uses the reaction to resist a specific damage type being used against you for that turn.

Back in 2014 I ran as Monster Slayer for a while and you can be a decently effective participant in the focus firing portion of a party along with the potential for a clutch play with Magic-User's Nemesis and some of the Monster Slayer Magic spell options.  I personally found it to be a bit limiting in dynamics getting all set up and then rolling attacks on one target most of the time.  I go more towards Hunter now and patrol around keeping mobs/adds off of the backline as much as possible.