Mostly beastmaster....with poor animal companion choices. The other ranger archetypes are generally solid, although they have poorly designed class features.
When picking an animal companion, if the intent is for the animal companion to FIGHT with you, you have to remember you're sacrificing one of your own attacks for the companion to do it's bit. SO, you have to pick a companion that has an attack equal to, or better than your own attack that you're sacrificing. Now, there ARE some good companions out there that are /worth/ sacrificing your attack for...but many of the available choices are poor picks. The animal companion dies easily, and IIRC the RAW is that when you get a new companion, the DM has a vote in what you get...so the DM might only give you crap options if your easy to kill companion, dies.
Factor that in with the fact that new players who don't know how to tell a good choice from a bad one...make 'bad' choices (though no fault of their own) and feel that the class sucks rather than the choices they made with the class they picked. Ranger sucking is more of a perception than a reality.
Some of the Hunter's options are also pretty bad. Giant Killer and Multiattack Defense are really not great options, and Horde Breaker is heavily situational.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
If you want to post up DPR in combat, certain beasts are going to be better for that than others, of course. Picking a rat to go into combat with is a bad idea. But a rat in an urban espionage game might be amazing! Same with a normal hawk or owl but in a vast outdoor exploration game. A base ranger does 1d8 + 3 with a long bow at level 3, and 1d8 + 5 twice with a longbow at level 10. Hunter's mark adds 1d6 to each hit on the marked creature. Most of the decent combat beast choices do about the same damage as a ranger using a longbow without hunter's mark (1d6 + 2 + 4 at levels 9-12). Some do more than that (wolf, panther, giant poisonous snake). Most of them have some kind of extra effect that comes as a rider on the attack (chance to knock prone, chance to grapple, chance to restrain, added poison damage, etc. Kind of like battle master maneuvers!). When fighting one large enemy hunter's mark is really good for the 2d6 added damage. But when fighting several enemies hunter's mark may not be able to proc each hit as we only have one bonus action each turn. In the multiple enemy situation the ranger loses zero damage output using the beast to attack the send or third targets. The beast's turn also happens in tandem with the ranger so this decision can be made on an at need basis. So you would lose the 1d6 damage anyway but now have a backup to do damage and something else along with it. The beast takes the attack action and grapple and shove use the attack action, so the beast's that don't grapple or knock prone as part of an attack can still do that if need be (like to move a target into position for a ranger's AoE spell). At level 11 the beast makes two attacks. Now the ranger of beasts is (using a combat appropriate beast) doing more consistent, repeatable DPR than any other ranger subclass (using the same weapon) in most situations most of the time. Many with added effects or chances of effects. Barding is cheap. If your paladin or fighter in the group has full plate mail, then Fido should have scale mail barding. Which bring their AC to the same as the humanoids (18-20). If the hunter's mark is the better way to go mathematically, and the ranger is popping arrow after arrow into the BBEG, then they still lose nothing but gain action economy in the help action or dodge action as a bonus action, either adding to aid in the party member's attacks and damage output or soaking up attacks from the BBEG with a pet that's dodging and an armor class of 20.
Concentration is not a big deal mathematically speaking. It is a level 1 spell slot. How much damage do we expect from a level 1 spell slot? 7? 9? 13.5? A paladin burning a level 1 spell slot does an average of 9 (2d8) added damage from the spell use. If hunter's mark is cast, held, and used on just three successful attacks over 2 turns it exceeds that smite damage with 10.5 (3d6)average damage. At higher levels the casting of a different spell, used in the way it is designed to be used, and factoring in the "loss" of hunter' mark damage, also does an appropriate amount of damage. A level 3 smite adds 18 (4d8) added damage to an attack. A 3rd level hail of thorns, hitting two targets, assuming a 50% chance to make the saving throw, subtracting the "loss" of hunter's mark damage, does an average of 17.75 added damage. This can be more if more targets are in the spell effect range.
The beast master benefits greatly from a good attacking beast after level 10 when using their AoE spells even more. Since they are "losing" hunter's mark, they are trading one of the ranger's attack for TWO of the beast's attacks, bringing the damage way up every time they cast hail of thorns or lightning arrow.
Comparing barbarians and paladins to rangers is a bit of a trap as they are all three very different designs. A strength based hunter or beast master ranger using a great sword with the defense fighting style can be compared however as they can still trigger their AoE spells with a thrown hand axe.
Ranger sucking is more of a perception than a reality.
Well, they are rather Concentration stuck. They can either do the one thing guaranteed to be useful, or use the rest of their list of stuff they could do.
IMO, that’s the real issue they face is that Hunter’s Mark requires concentration. If it was weaker, maybe 1d4, but Concentration-free, they would have a totally different reputation.
Yeah, it's a problem that rangers think that Hunter's Mark is critical. Warlocks have the same issue with Hex, and they care far less about losing it. Frankly, if I was going to play a ranger again, it would probably be a horizon walker, and I wouldn't bother with Hunter's mark.
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.
If you want to post up DPR in combat, certain beasts are going to be better for that than others, of course. Picking a rat to go into combat with is a bad idea. But a rat in an urban espionage game might be amazing! Same with a normal hawk or owl but in a vast outdoor exploration game. A base ranger does 1d8 + 3 with a long bow at level 3, and 1d8 + 5 twice with a longbow at level 10. Hunter's mark adds 1d6 to each hit on the marked creature. Most of the decent combat beast choices do about the same damage as a ranger using a longbow without hunter's mark (1d6 + 2 + 4 at levels 9-12). Some do more than that (wolf, panther, giant poisonous snake). Most of them have some kind of extra effect that comes as a rider on the attack (chance to knock prone, chance to grapple, chance to restrain, added poison damage, etc. Kind of like battle master maneuvers!). When fighting one large enemy hunter's mark is really good for the 2d6 added damage. But when fighting several enemies hunter's mark may not be able to proc each hit as we only have one bonus action each turn. In the multiple enemy situation the ranger loses zero damage output using the beast to attack the send or third targets. The beast's turn also happens in tandem with the ranger so this decision can be made on an at need basis. So you would lose the 1d6 damage anyway but now have a backup to do damage and something else along with it. The beast takes the attack action and grapple and shove use the attack action, so the beast's that don't grapple or knock prone as part of an attack can still do that if need be (like to move a target into position for a ranger's AoE spell). At level 11 the beast makes two attacks. Now the ranger of beasts is (using a combat appropriate beast) doing more consistent, repeatable DPR than any other ranger subclass (using the same weapon) in most situations most of the time. Many with added effects or chances of effects. Barding is cheap. If your paladin or fighter in the group has full plate mail, then Fido should have scale mail barding. Which bring their AC to the same as the humanoids (18-20). If the hunter's mark is the better way to go mathematically, and the ranger is popping arrow after arrow into the BBEG, then they still lose nothing but gain action economy in the help action or dodge action as a bonus action, either adding to aid in the party member's attacks and damage output or soaking up attacks from the BBEG with a pet that's dodging and an armor class of 20.
Concentration is not a big deal mathematically speaking. It is a level 1 spell slot. How much damage do we expect from a level 1 spell slot? 7? 9? 13.5? A paladin burning a level 1 spell slot does an average of 9 (2d8) added damage from the spell use. If hunter's mark is cast, held, and used on just three successful attacks over 2 turns it exceeds that smite damage with 10.5 (3d6)average damage. At higher levels the casting of a different spell, used in the way it is designed to be used, and factoring in the "loss" of hunter' mark damage, also does an appropriate amount of damage. A level 3 smite adds 18 (4d8) added damage to an attack. A 3rd level hail of thorns, hitting two targets, assuming a 50% chance to make the saving throw, subtracting the "loss" of hunter's mark damage, does an average of 17.75 added damage. This can be more if more targets are in the spell effect range.
The beast master benefits greatly from a good attacking beast after level 10 when using their AoE spells even more. Since they are "losing" hunter's mark, they are trading one of the ranger's attack for TWO of the beast's attacks, bringing the damage way up every time they cast hail of thorns or lightning arrow.
Comparing barbarians and paladins to rangers is a bit of a trap as they are all three very different designs. A strength based hunter or beast master ranger using a great sword with the defense fighting style can be compared however as they can still trigger their AoE spells with a thrown hand axe.
This post is why BM's /can/ work, if the player is a veteran and understands the nature of the choice they are making. If you don't know what the consequences of the choices you make are though, it's a big white van with "FREE CANDY" painted on the side.
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.
If you want to post up DPR in combat, certain beasts are going to be better for that than others, of course. Picking a rat to go into combat with is a bad idea. But a rat in an urban espionage game might be amazing! Same with a normal hawk or owl but in a vast outdoor exploration game. A base ranger does 1d8 + 3 with a long bow at level 3, and 1d8 + 5 twice with a longbow at level 10. Hunter's mark adds 1d6 to each hit on the marked creature. Most of the decent combat beast choices do about the same damage as a ranger using a longbow without hunter's mark (1d6 + 2 + 4 at levels 9-12). Some do more than that (wolf, panther, giant poisonous snake). Most of them have some kind of extra effect that comes as a rider on the attack (chance to knock prone, chance to grapple, chance to restrain, added poison damage, etc. Kind of like battle master maneuvers!). When fighting one large enemy hunter's mark is really good for the 2d6 added damage. But when fighting several enemies hunter's mark may not be able to proc each hit as we only have one bonus action each turn. In the multiple enemy situation the ranger loses zero damage output using the beast to attack the send or third targets. The beast's turn also happens in tandem with the ranger so this decision can be made on an at need basis. So you would lose the 1d6 damage anyway but now have a backup to do damage and something else along with it. The beast takes the attack action and grapple and shove use the attack action, so the beast's that don't grapple or knock prone as part of an attack can still do that if need be (like to move a target into position for a ranger's AoE spell). At level 11 the beast makes two attacks. Now the ranger of beasts is (using a combat appropriate beast) doing more consistent, repeatable DPR than any other ranger subclass (using the same weapon) in most situations most of the time. Many with added effects or chances of effects. Barding is cheap. If your paladin or fighter in the group has full plate mail, then Fido should have scale mail barding. Which bring their AC to the same as the humanoids (18-20). If the hunter's mark is the better way to go mathematically, and the ranger is popping arrow after arrow into the BBEG, then they still lose nothing but gain action economy in the help action or dodge action as a bonus action, either adding to aid in the party member's attacks and damage output or soaking up attacks from the BBEG with a pet that's dodging and an armor class of 20.
Concentration is not a big deal mathematically speaking. It is a level 1 spell slot. How much damage do we expect from a level 1 spell slot? 7? 9? 13.5? A paladin burning a level 1 spell slot does an average of 9 (2d8) added damage from the spell use. If hunter's mark is cast, held, and used on just three successful attacks over 2 turns it exceeds that smite damage with 10.5 (3d6)average damage. At higher levels the casting of a different spell, used in the way it is designed to be used, and factoring in the "loss" of hunter' mark damage, also does an appropriate amount of damage. A level 3 smite adds 18 (4d8) added damage to an attack. A 3rd level hail of thorns, hitting two targets, assuming a 50% chance to make the saving throw, subtracting the "loss" of hunter's mark damage, does an average of 17.75 added damage. This can be more if more targets are in the spell effect range.
The beast master benefits greatly from a good attacking beast after level 10 when using their AoE spells even more. Since they are "losing" hunter's mark, they are trading one of the ranger's attack for TWO of the beast's attacks, bringing the damage way up every time they cast hail of thorns or lightning arrow.
Comparing barbarians and paladins to rangers is a bit of a trap as they are all three very different designs. A strength based hunter or beast master ranger using a great sword with the defense fighting style can be compared however as they can still trigger their AoE spells with a thrown hand axe.
This post is why BM's /can/ work, if the player is a veteran and understands the nature of the choice they are making. If you don't know what the consequences of the choices you make are though, it's a big white van with "FREE CANDY" painted on the side.
I prefer playing strength Rangers, but the Archer Ranger is by far one of the most impressive sustained damage dealers in the game. It is undeniable the pain they can just keep delivering.
To everyone who looks at the Ranged Damage diagram. Please, read the calculation and class build because it shows the limit on the analysis. I am not saying analysis is useless or bad but just like many analyses, they have their limits and assumption. The writer did a good job on showing those information.
The calculation is for the single-target only. Therefore we don't see a damage jump for the Hunter at level 11 because Volley doesn't increase single target damage. Volley will increase Hunter's total damage but it is not in the calculation.
If the subclass is Horizon Walker, we will see the damage jump on lv9 due to the Hast. It will have a small boost at level 11 when Planar Warrior damage changes from 1d8 to 2d8. However, Distant Strike will not have any effect on the calculation.
If the subclass is Fey Wanderer, it will have lower damage at the start because it doesn't have the extra d8 damage but people would see an increase in damage at level 11 due to Fey Reinforcements.
My point is: don't take the graph/analysis as a golden rule or perfect calculation. It gives some good knowledge but it has its limits.
True. Speaking of AoE damage, baseline rangers and warlocks also have access to some pretty massive AoE attacks. Outside the white room, hail of thorns, lightning arrow, and fireball would give these classes a big jump in damage output.
Conjure animals is something else that all rangers can bring to the table that will greatly increase their damage output. So can the new summon spells in Tasha’s.
True. Speaking of AoE damage, baseline rangers and warlocks also have access to some pretty massive AoE attacks. Outside the white room, hail of thorns, lightning arrow, and fireball would give these classes a big jump in damage output.
Conjure animals is something else that all rangers can bring to the table that will greatly increase their damage output. So can the new summon spells in Tasha’s.
only fiendlocks and efreeti warlocks gain the secrets of fireball, but oh lawd can they spam fireball as much as they want
also fey wanderer warlocks can cast summon fey without concentration even when they cast it using their spell slots, letting them potentially cast the spell many times during the same combat and thus tilt action economy in their favor
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
fireball? don't be silly, fireball will never be on the ranger spell list, i mean what would they use it for? forest fires?
and if you mean Fey wanderer, well it IS from tasha's cauldron of everything dude, that's the one
I was talking about two classes and their class spells. Obviously fireball isn’t a ranger spell. Just as hail of thorns and lightning arrow aren’t warlock spells.
True. Speaking of AoE damage, baseline rangers and warlocks also have access to some pretty massive AoE attacks. Outside the white room, hail of thorns, lightning arrow, and fireball would give these classes a big jump in damage output.
Conjure animals is something else that all rangers can bring to the table that will greatly increase their damage output. So can the new summon spells in Tasha’s.
only fiendlocks and efreeti warlocks gain the secrets of fireball, but oh lawd can they spam fireball as much as they want
also fey wanderer warlocks can cast summon fey without concentration even when they cast it using their spell slots, letting them potentially cast the spell many times during the same combat and thus tilt action economy in their favor
fireball? don't be silly, fireball will never be on the ranger spell list, i mean what would they use it for? forest fires?
and if you mean Fey wanderer, well it IS from tasha's cauldron of everything dude, that's the one
I was talking about two classes and their class spells. Obviously fireball isn’t a ranger spell. Just as hail of thorns and lightning arrow aren’t warlock spells.
YOU specifically said fey wanderer warlock.
Pretty certain he's talking about a multiclass Warlock/Fey Wanderer?
Some of the Hunter's options are also pretty bad. Giant Killer and Multiattack Defense are really not great options, and Horde Breaker is heavily situational.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
If you want to post up DPR in combat, certain beasts are going to be better for that than others, of course. Picking a rat to go into combat with is a bad idea. But a rat in an urban espionage game might be amazing! Same with a normal hawk or owl but in a vast outdoor exploration game. A base ranger does 1d8 + 3 with a long bow at level 3, and 1d8 + 5 twice with a longbow at level 10. Hunter's mark adds 1d6 to each hit on the marked creature. Most of the decent combat beast choices do about the same damage as a ranger using a longbow without hunter's mark (1d6 + 2 + 4 at levels 9-12). Some do more than that (wolf, panther, giant poisonous snake). Most of them have some kind of extra effect that comes as a rider on the attack (chance to knock prone, chance to grapple, chance to restrain, added poison damage, etc. Kind of like battle master maneuvers!). When fighting one large enemy hunter's mark is really good for the 2d6 added damage. But when fighting several enemies hunter's mark may not be able to proc each hit as we only have one bonus action each turn. In the multiple enemy situation the ranger loses zero damage output using the beast to attack the send or third targets. The beast's turn also happens in tandem with the ranger so this decision can be made on an at need basis. So you would lose the 1d6 damage anyway but now have a backup to do damage and something else along with it. The beast takes the attack action and grapple and shove use the attack action, so the beast's that don't grapple or knock prone as part of an attack can still do that if need be (like to move a target into position for a ranger's AoE spell). At level 11 the beast makes two attacks. Now the ranger of beasts is (using a combat appropriate beast) doing more consistent, repeatable DPR than any other ranger subclass (using the same weapon) in most situations most of the time. Many with added effects or chances of effects. Barding is cheap. If your paladin or fighter in the group has full plate mail, then Fido should have scale mail barding. Which bring their AC to the same as the humanoids (18-20). If the hunter's mark is the better way to go mathematically, and the ranger is popping arrow after arrow into the BBEG, then they still lose nothing but gain action economy in the help action or dodge action as a bonus action, either adding to aid in the party member's attacks and damage output or soaking up attacks from the BBEG with a pet that's dodging and an armor class of 20.
Concentration is not a big deal mathematically speaking. It is a level 1 spell slot. How much damage do we expect from a level 1 spell slot? 7? 9? 13.5? A paladin burning a level 1 spell slot does an average of 9 (2d8) added damage from the spell use. If hunter's mark is cast, held, and used on just three successful attacks over 2 turns it exceeds that smite damage with 10.5 (3d6)average damage. At higher levels the casting of a different spell, used in the way it is designed to be used, and factoring in the "loss" of hunter' mark damage, also does an appropriate amount of damage. A level 3 smite adds 18 (4d8) added damage to an attack. A 3rd level hail of thorns, hitting two targets, assuming a 50% chance to make the saving throw, subtracting the "loss" of hunter's mark damage, does an average of 17.75 added damage. This can be more if more targets are in the spell effect range.
The beast master benefits greatly from a good attacking beast after level 10 when using their AoE spells even more. Since they are "losing" hunter's mark, they are trading one of the ranger's attack for TWO of the beast's attacks, bringing the damage way up every time they cast hail of thorns or lightning arrow.
Comparing barbarians and paladins to rangers is a bit of a trap as they are all three very different designs. A strength based hunter or beast master ranger using a great sword with the defense fighting style can be compared however as they can still trigger their AoE spells with a thrown hand axe.
Yeah, it's a problem that rangers think that Hunter's Mark is critical. Warlocks have the same issue with Hex, and they care far less about losing it. Frankly, if I was going to play a ranger again, it would probably be a horizon walker, and I wouldn't bother with Hunter's mark.
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
This post is why BM's /can/ work, if the player is a veteran and understands the nature of the choice they are making. If you don't know what the consequences of the choices you make are though, it's a big white van with "FREE CANDY" painted on the side.
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
LOL! True.
in pure white room math:
the ranger is the strongest archer class until 11, and still keeps up in dmg the rest of the game.
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?375185-Class-Comparisons-for-Ranged-Damage
This is 100% true.
I prefer playing strength Rangers, but the Archer Ranger is by far one of the most impressive sustained damage dealers in the game. It is undeniable the pain they can just keep delivering.
To everyone who looks at the Ranged Damage diagram. Please, read the calculation and class build because it shows the limit on the analysis. I am not saying analysis is useless or bad but just like many analyses, they have their limits and assumption. The writer did a good job on showing those information.
The calculation is for the single-target only. Therefore we don't see a damage jump for the Hunter at level 11 because Volley doesn't increase single target damage. Volley will increase Hunter's total damage but it is not in the calculation.
If the subclass is Horizon Walker, we will see the damage jump on lv9 due to the Hast. It will have a small boost at level 11 when Planar Warrior damage changes from 1d8 to 2d8. However, Distant Strike will not have any effect on the calculation.
If the subclass is Fey Wanderer, it will have lower damage at the start because it doesn't have the extra d8 damage but people would see an increase in damage at level 11 due to Fey Reinforcements.
My point is: don't take the graph/analysis as a golden rule or perfect calculation. It gives some good knowledge but it has its limits.
True. Speaking of AoE damage, baseline rangers and warlocks also have access to some pretty massive AoE attacks. Outside the white room, hail of thorns, lightning arrow, and fireball would give these classes a big jump in damage output.
Conjure animals is something else that all rangers can bring to the table that will greatly increase their damage output. So can the new summon spells in Tasha’s.
only fiendlocks and efreeti warlocks gain the secrets of fireball, but oh lawd can they spam fireball as much as they want
also fey wanderer warlocks can cast summon fey without concentration even when they cast it using their spell slots, letting them potentially cast the spell many times during the same combat and thus tilt action economy in their favor
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
Doesn’t one of the Tasha’s rangers have that too?
fireball? don't be silly, fireball will never be on the ranger spell list, i mean what would they use it for? forest fires?
and if you mean Fey wanderer, well it IS from tasha's cauldron of everything dude, that's the one
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
I was talking about two classes and their class spells. Obviously fireball isn’t a ranger spell. Just as hail of thorns and lightning arrow aren’t warlock spells.
YOU specifically said fey wanderer warlock.
👆
Also, how can those two warlocks spam fireball as much as they want?
I presume they mean with short rests between fights.
Is getting/taking/being allowed a short rest after each fight considered to be pretty standard?
Pretty certain he's talking about a multiclass Warlock/Fey Wanderer?
Not in the games I play, special action and spell slot management remain vital for my Ranger / echo