The reason why rangers "suck" is that because all other classes are simply better. Rangers in and off themselves aren't really "bad" per se. As for their abilities being situational? Well, so can most other class abilites be as well. Being a champion fighter will probably be pretty boring in a high-society game of intrigue. At the same time, an assassin who will never get the chance disguise himself because the story is focused on wilderness survival is likewise going to be pretty bored.
That said, favoured terrain/enemy can be pretty damn useful and remember that you get more of them as you level up. The extra perks (like languages, don't forget the languages!) can be really useful depending on the setting.
The three boosted subclasses in Xanathar's are all really cool as well. :)
well i mean an assasin rouge would do pretty damm fine in an wilderness setting depending on what expertise he has and wheter or not he can use his fantastic abillity to get a crit for free, and the wilderness also allows for better poison manufacture
Well, if you had read my post you would have notived that I was talking about that Assassin's ability to create disguises for themselves. That whole point is a counter to the statement that Ranger's Favoured Terrain/Enemy abilities are situational. Yes, but so are other class abilities as well.
((oh **** this rant took like 40 minutes to write i have homework to do what am i doing ****))
Yeah, good question. Especially since half of it was kind of wrong and still missing the point.
First of all, yes of course you can make up all kinds of far-fetched scenarios where an Assassin can disguise themselves as an old lady. but why would they? Or what if the campaign is an old-fashioned dungeoncrawl? The point you seem to be missing is that many class abilities are situational. Some more than others, sure. But that's not the problem with Rangers.
Second of all, the extra languages aren't tied to combat abilites and they give the Ranger options in any terrain that they are in. You DO know that Rangers doesn't have to be in their favoured terrain to use those languages or their favoured enemy abilities, right?
Third of all, the Rangers ability to track and fight other foes is called "Hunter's Mark" and Survival in combination with a high Wisdom score. Also Hunter's Prey, etc.
Lastly, the level 20 ability works against at least three different kinds of foes, not just one.
[Long rant]
Again, you're completely missing the point and you keep arguing the same things over and over again even though they've already been adressed. It's getting a bit silly, really. try to follow this time, please.
Again, the point that you keep failing to understand is that what makes the Ranger class one of the less good ones is not the lack of useful abilities but rather that many of the other classes simply have better abilities. The fact that some of the Ranger's abilities can be situational does not make them bad abilities. Do you not understand the difference?
That said, many of the complaints you have is not really something that has naything to do with the Ranger but rather the setting. And since the setting is all up to the DM and the players, that's not something you can blame on a class either. If a certain creature can speak common or not doesn't affect the usefulness of knowing other languages. For example, even if both you and an NPC you meet speak Common, knowing a language that the NPC does not gives you the option to communicate with other people without that NPC understanding you. Which can be very useful. Saying that languages aren't useful is like saying that Thieves' Cant isn't useful. Sure, if the DM doesn't give you chance to use it, it's useful. But as an ability of it's own it has uses.
The Paladin's healing is worthless if no-one is injured and so is the Fighter's fighting abilities if there is no-one to fight. Clerics get spellcasting because they are spellcasters, that's the whole point.
Do Rangers have a pretty crappy capstone ability? Yes. But so do Monks and Bards and they are amongst the most powerful classes in the game.
Hunter's Mark is not "more of an combat spell", it can be used both in an out of combat and there's nothing that says that you have to "cast it right as the opponent get away" for it to work. Either way, it is another way that Rangers have better tracking abilities than other classes, something that you wrongly claimed they don't.
The reason why rangers "suck" is that because all other classes are simply better. Rangers in and off themselves aren't really "bad" per se. As for their abilities being situational? Well, so can most other class abilites be as well. Being a champion fighter will probably be pretty boring in a high-society game of intrigue. At the same time, an assassin who will never get the chance disguise himself because the story is focused on wilderness survival is likewise going to be pretty bored.
That said, favoured terrain/enemy can be pretty damn useful and remember that you get more of them as you level up. The extra perks (like languages, don't forget the languages!) can be really useful depending on the setting.
The three boosted subclasses in Xanathar's are all really cool as well. :)
well i mean an assasin rouge would do pretty damm fine in an wilderness setting depending on what expertise he has and wheter or not he can use his fantastic abillity to get a crit for free, and the wilderness also allows for better poison manufacture
Well, if you had read my post you would have notived that I was talking about that Assassin's ability to create disguises for themselves. That whole point is a counter to the statement that Ranger's Favoured Terrain/Enemy abilities are situational. Yes, but so are other class abilities as well.
((oh **** this rant took like 40 minutes to write i have homework to do what am i doing ****))
Yeah, good question. Especially since half of it was kind of wrong and still missing the point.
First of all, yes of course you can make up all kinds of far-fetched scenarios where an Assassin can disguise themselves as an old lady. but why would they? Or what if the campaign is an old-fashioned dungeoncrawl? The point you seem to be missing is that many class abilities are situational. Some more than others, sure. But that's not the problem with Rangers.
Second of all, the extra languages aren't tied to combat abilites and they give the Ranger options in any terrain that they are in. You DO know that Rangers doesn't have to be in their favoured terrain to use those languages or their favoured enemy abilities, right?
Third of all, the Rangers ability to track and fight other foes is called "Hunter's Mark" and Survival in combination with a high Wisdom score. Also Hunter's Prey, etc.
Lastly, the level 20 ability works against at least three different kinds of foes, not just one.
[Long rant]
Again, you're completely missing the point and you keep arguing the same things over and over again even though they've already been adressed. It's getting a bit silly, really. try to follow this time, please.
Again, the point that you keep failing to understand is that what makes the Ranger class one of the less good ones is not the lack of useful abilities but rather that many of the other classes simply have better abilities. The fact that some of the Ranger's abilities can be situational does not make them bad abilities. Do you not understand the difference?
That said, many of the complaints you have is not really something that has naything to do with the Ranger but rather the setting. And since the setting is all up to the DM and the players, that's not something you can blame on a class either. If a certain creature can speak common or not doesn't affect the usefulness of knowing other languages. For example, even if both you and an NPC you meet speak Common, knowing a language that the NPC does not gives you the option to communicate with other people without that NPC understanding you. Which can be very useful. Saying that languages aren't useful is like saying that Thieves' Cant isn't useful. Sure, if the DM doesn't give you chance to use it, it's useful. But as an ability of it's own it has uses.
The Paladin's healing is worthless if no-one is injured and so is the Fighter's fighting abilities if there is no-one to fight. Clerics get spellcasting because they are spellcasters, that's the whole point.
Do Rangers have a pretty crappy capstone ability? Yes. But so do Monks and Bards and they are amongst the most powerful classes in the game.
Hunter's Mark is not "more of an combat spell", it can be used both in an out of combat and there's nothing that says that you have to "cast it right as the opponent get away" for it to work. Either way, it is another way that Rangers have better tracking abilities than other classes, something that you wrongly claimed they don't.
well, you need to be within 90 ft of an target for hunters mark to work, and you need to see your target, and it is supposed to help you track things. If the target is in view then you probably do not need to track them, so it would be used mostly to ether pursue an fleeing target or to put it on somebody you want to follow but who you want to stay hidden from, or similar situations. survival proficiency and high wisdom scores are something any class can get, but this is unique and useful so fair point
yes, i do get what you are trying to say, abillities being situational is not exactly an bad thing, and every class will always have certain areas in whom they will excell and places where they lack, every class has its advantages and disadvantages, overall the ranger class is a fine class but in terms of these two specific class features i still disagree.
of course there exists other class features wich are specific, but these two are easily the two most situational class features in the game, and they feel kind of needlessly situational, many class features might struggle against situations meant to counteract them, but these two features stuggle in situations outside the few where they are supposed to work, they could work perfectly as so-called ribbon abillities that dont add much power and exists alongside other features to add flavour or as more general abillities, without that nessesarily making the class too powerful. Imagine that the wizard had an feature that prevented him from casting spells within 10 minutes of crossing a river, would that make the class weaker? maybe not, but it would be an kind of stupid, arbitrary and unnecessary restriction
imagine the following: natural explorer gets split up into two features: favoured terrain and natural explorer. The new feature called natural explorer only lets you travel stealthily at an normal pace and remain alert even when engaging in another activity, but it works in any terrain weras favoured terrain, the new feature gets all the benefits of old natural exploer but it works in any sort of terrain. favoured enemy and natural explorer are given out at 1st level together with the roving variant feature from that unearthed arcana article, and then your first favoured terrain is gained at level 2, and also you give some incredebly weak third feature to the ranger at level 6 like the abillity to craft nonmagiacl items faster, not much just something more than additional favoured terrain and enemy types. By doing this, you have made the class a little more versatile especially at level 1 without being significantly more powerful than any other class and without changing much. They are fine features, but they cannot carry an level on their own, again i think they should be the cherry on top of the slice of cake that is a single level of ranger, not an entire level, favored enemy and natural explorer does not need to be this restrictive, and they dont need to be the only thing you get during a single level
as for the ranger not being bad, it is just that other classes are really good? well that is simply a matter of perspective, is it not? all power is relative, if there was only one dnd class that existed in a void there would be no way for it to be ether powerful or weak, it is only when other thing exist that you can compare them that you can say one is good and that others are bad, if you agree there is an power gap then it does not really matter what you call it, it ought to be closed as best we can
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
How often do people take a level 1 dip into Ranger?
If they got a fighting style at 1st level people would.
They already do that with Fighter. Why would it be bad for then to do the same with Ranger? They would still have to dip 2 levels to gain access to Hunter's Mark.
Sure, they could dip 1 Fighter and 1 Ranger and have 2 Fighting Styles, but that is not exactly game breaking considering that it would take 2 levels. Heck, I would still choose dipping 1 Fighter over Ranger because Second Wind is better than both Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer on most days.
How often do people take a level 1 dip into Ranger?
If they got a fighting style at 1st level people would.
They already do that with Fighter. Why would it be bad for then to do the same with Ranger? They would still have to dip 2 levels to gain access to Hunter's Mark.
Sure, they could dip 1 Fighter and 1 Ranger and have 2 Fighting Styles, but that is not exactly game breaking considering that it would take 2 levels. Heck, I would still choose dipping 1 Fighter over Ranger because Second Wind is better than both Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer on most days.
Three words: Variant Class Features:
Favored Foe (Replaces Favored Enemy)
1st-level ranger feature
You can call on your bond with nature to mark a creature as your favored enemy for a time: you know the hunter's mark spell, and Wisdom is your spellcasting ability for it. You can use it a certain number of times without expending a spell slot and without requiring concentration— a number of times equal to your Wisdom modifier (a minimum of once). You regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest. When you gain the Spellcasting feature at 2nd level, hunter's mark doesn't count against the number of ranger spells you know.
You are an unsurpassed explorer and survivor. Choose one of the following benefits, and then choose another one at 6th and 10th level.
Canny
Choose one: Animal Handling, Athletics, History, Insight, Investigation, Medicine, Nature, Perception, Stealth, or Survival. You gain proficiency in the chosen skill if you don't already have it, and you can add double your proficiency bonus to ability checks using that skill. In addition, thanks to your extensive wandering, you are able to speak, read, and write two languages of your choice.
Roving
Your walking speed increases by 5, and you gain a climbing speed and a swimming speed equal to your walking speed.
Tireless
As an action, you can give yourself a number of temporary hit points equal to 1d10 + your Wisdom modifier. You can use this special action a number of times equal to your Wisdom modifier (a minimum of once), and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest. In addition, whenever you finish a short rest, your exhaustion level, if any, is decreased by 1.
Variant Fighting Styles (Enhances Fighting Style)
2nd-level ranger feature
When you gain the Fighting Style feature, you get access to the “Variant Fighting Styles,” the Druidic Warrior style is also added to the list of style options available to you.
Druidic Warrior. You learn two cantrips of your choice from the druid spell list. They count as ranger spells for you, and Wisdom is your spellcasting ability for them. Whenever you gain a level in this class, you can replace one of these cantrips with another cantrip from the druid spell list.
Blind Fighting. Being unable to see a creature doesn't impose disadvantage on your attack rolls against it, provided the creature isn't hidden from you.
Interception. When a creature you can see hits a target that is within 5 feet of you with an attack, you can use your reaction to reduce the damage the target takes by 1d10 + your proficiency bonus (to a minimum of 0 damage). You must be wielding a shield or a simple or martial weapon to use this reaction.
Thrown Weapon Fighting. You can draw a weapon that has the thrown property as part of the attack you make with the weapon. In addition, when you hit with a ranged attack using a thrown weapon, you gain a +1 bonus to the damage roll.
Unarmed Fighting. Your unarmed strikes can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier. If you strike with two free hands, the d6 becomes a d8. When you successfully start a grapple, you can deal 1d4 bludgeoning damage to the grappled creature. Until the grapple ends, you can also deal this damage to the creature whenever you hit it with a melee attack.
How often do people take a level 1 dip into Ranger?
If they got a fighting style at 1st level people would.
They already do that with Fighter. Why would it be bad for then to do the same with Ranger? They would still have to dip 2 levels to gain access to Hunter's Mark.
Sure, they could dip 1 Fighter and 1 Ranger and have 2 Fighting Styles, but that is not exactly game breaking considering that it would take 2 levels. Heck, I would still choose dipping 1 Fighter over Ranger because Second Wind is better than both Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer on most days.
first of all the fighting style feature says as follows: "you cant take a fighting style option more than once, even if you later get to choose again", this may be interpreted as simply you not being able to take archery twice, but it can also be interpreted as you cannot have a second fighting style, even from multiclassing.
Also what would you remove at 1st level to make fighting style a 1st level choice? will it be natural explorer? will it be favoured enemy? will it be both? with the new UA that will likely become official (hopefully), you could get hunters mark at level one, that plus fighting style and why whould you even progress further in the class suddenly? also giving it at level 1 would mean you would have to give something more at 2nd level, and it would also be an huge middle finger to both the fighter and the paladin class for diffrent reasons, fighters are primarily an skilled combatant, rangers are primarily an protector of the wilderness and an combatant second, just like how the palladin works, doing that would be a massive dick move and would only serve to appease the part of the community who likes multiclassing and optimization, possibly fun but it would kinda ruin some stuff
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
How often do people take a level 1 dip into Ranger?
If they got a fighting style at 1st level people would.
They already do that with Fighter. Why would it be bad for then to do the same with Ranger? They would still have to dip 2 levels to gain access to Hunter's Mark.
Sure, they could dip 1 Fighter and 1 Ranger and have 2 Fighting Styles, but that is not exactly game breaking considering that it would take 2 levels. Heck, I would still choose dipping 1 Fighter over Ranger because Second Wind is better than both Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer on most days.
first of all the fighting style feature says as follows: "you cant take a fighting style option more than once, even if you later get to choose again", this may be interpreted as simply you not being able to take archery twice, but it can also be interpreted as you cannot have a second fighting style, even from multiclassing.
Also what would you remove at 1st level to make fighting style a 1st level choice? will it be natural explorer? will it be favoured enemy? will it be both? with the new UA that will likely become official (hopefully), you could get hunters mark at level one, that plus fighting style and why whould you even progress further in the class suddenly? also giving it at level 1 would mean you would have to give something more at 2nd level, and it would also be an huge middle finger to both the fighter and the paladin class for diffrent reasons, fighters are primarily an skilled combatant, rangers are primarily an protector of the wilderness and an combatant second, just like how the palladin works, doing that would be a massive dick move and would only serve to appease the part of the community who likes multiclassing and optimization, possibly fun but it would kinda ruin some stuff
I can't honestly say I have ever heard the argument that you can't have two different Fighting Styles.
I would get rid of neither because together they make one ok ability.
I don't count the UA options as they are not as of yet a official option. However, if they do get published, then this whole discussion becomes pointless as the issue of lack luster Ranger abilities would be resolved for the most part.
As for making a 2nd level feature to replace Fighting Style, giving them a couple of Druid Cantrips would be nice and add to their versatility.
I am not saying that these are changes the should be made. I am saying that they could have made Ranger a better class from the start without too much issue.
How often do people take a level 1 dip into Ranger?
If they got a fighting style at 1st level people would.
They already do that with Fighter. Why would it be bad for then to do the same with Ranger? They would still have to dip 2 levels to gain access to Hunter's Mark.
Sure, they could dip 1 Fighter and 1 Ranger and have 2 Fighting Styles, but that is not exactly game breaking considering that it would take 2 levels. Heck, I would still choose dipping 1 Fighter over Ranger because Second Wind is better than both Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer on most days.
first of all the fighting style feature says as follows: "you cant take a fighting style option more than once, even if you later get to choose again", this may be interpreted as simply you not being able to take archery twice, but it can also be interpreted as you cannot have a second fighting style, even from multiclassing.
No it can't. It says "even if you later get to choose again". That means that you can choose more than one as long as it is different. Also, the Champion's 10th level ability would be worthless if what you say is true.
And the reason why Rangers don't get fighting style until level 2 is to show that the Ranger has a primary focus on tracking and survival rather just fighting.
How often do people take a level 1 dip into Ranger?
If they got a fighting style at 1st level people would.
They already do that with Fighter. Why would it be bad for then to do the same with Ranger? They would still have to dip 2 levels to gain access to Hunter's Mark.
Sure, they could dip 1 Fighter and 1 Ranger and have 2 Fighting Styles, but that is not exactly game breaking considering that it would take 2 levels. Heck, I would still choose dipping 1 Fighter over Ranger because Second Wind is better than both Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer on most days.
first of all the fighting style feature says as follows: "you cant take a fighting style option more than once, even if you later get to choose again", this may be interpreted as simply you not being able to take archery twice, but it can also be interpreted as you cannot have a second fighting style, even from multiclassing.
No it can't. It says "even if you later get to choose again". That menas that you can choose more than one as long as it is different. Also, the Champion's 10th level ability would be worthless if what you say is true.
And the reason why Rangers don't get fighting style until level 2 is to show that the Ranger has a primary focus on tracking and survival rather just fighting.
if my interpretation were true, champion fighter would still give you two fighting styles becuase specific rules beat general rules, but to be fair it is a really stupid interpretation now that i think about it so who really cares.
well i think it is partially becuase as you said the ranger has more of a focus on other things like spellcasting, tracking, combat is just one of the things the ranger can do and also it makes the fighter less special, and i wholeheartedly agree that puting it at 1st level is an bad idea
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
How often do people take a level 1 dip into Ranger?
If they got a fighting style at 1st level people would.
They already do that with Fighter. Why would it be bad for then to do the same with Ranger? They would still have to dip 2 levels to gain access to Hunter's Mark.
Sure, they could dip 1 Fighter and 1 Ranger and have 2 Fighting Styles, but that is not exactly game breaking considering that it would take 2 levels. Heck, I would still choose dipping 1 Fighter over Ranger because Second Wind is better than both Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer on most days.
first of all the fighting style feature says as follows: "you cant take a fighting style option more than once, even if you later get to choose again", this may be interpreted as simply you not being able to take archery twice, but it can also be interpreted as you cannot have a second fighting style, even from multiclassing.
No it can't. It says "even if you later get to choose again". That menas that you can choose more than one as long as it is different. Also, the Champion's 10th level ability would be worthless if what you say is true.
And the reason why Rangers don't get fighting style until level 2 is to show that the Ranger has a primary focus on tracking and survival rather just fighting.
if my interpretation were true, champion fighter would still give you two fighting styles becuase specific rules beat general rules, but to be fair it is a really stupid interpretation now that i think about it so who really cares.
"well i think it is partially becuase as you said the ranger has more of a focus on other things like spellcasting, tracking, combat is just one of the things the ranger can do and also it makes the fighter less special, and i wholeheartedly agree that puting it at 1st level is an bad idea"
Druids are better Trackers than Rangers since they often have higher Wisdom. The Fact that Rangers have advantage in a very small number to terrains is not very impressive over all. If you wanted them to be Survival/Nature experts, they should have just given them Expertise in those Skills and been done with it. Then they would useful everywhere they go.
Fighting Style is an ability shared by 3 classes, so not really a defining feature of Fighters. Because of that, saying it would make Fighter less special is not a very good argument in my opinion.
As for Spellcasting, they are not very good at that either and I believe that is because of Hunter's Mark. Ranger is heavily dependent upon it so the first few levels, their spell slots are "reserved" for casting it.
Special Note: Hunter's Mark should have been a class feature instead of a spell similar to Hexblade's Curse.
"well i think it is partially becuase as you said the ranger has more of a focus on other things like spellcasting, tracking, combat is just one of the things the ranger can do and also it makes the fighter less special, and i wholeheartedly agree that puting it at 1st level is an bad idea"
Druids are better Trackers than Rangers since they often have higher Wisdom. The Fact that Rangers have advantage in a very small number to terrains is not very impressive over all. If you wanted them to be Survival/Nature experts, they should have just given them Expertise in those Skills and been done with it. Then they would useful everywhere they go.
Fighting Style is an ability shared by 3 classes, so not really a defining feature of Fighters. Because of that, saying it would make Fighter less special is not a very good argument in my opinion.
As for Spellcasting, they are not very good at that either and I believe that is because of Hunter's Mark. Ranger is heavily dependent upon it so the first few levels, their spell slots are "reserved" for casting it.
Special Note: Hunter's Mark should have been a class feature instead of a spell similar to Hexblade's Curse.
3 classes gain fighting style, that is correct, and rangers ******* suck at tracking compared to rouges and druids, but fighter is the only class that gains fighting style at level 1, all other half casters gain their fighting styles at level 2, that is what i meant by it would make fighters less special, they get it earlier becuase their singleminded devotion to combat and only combat means they perfect their perfered style of fighing at an earlier level than the ranger and palladin, becuase while they too are combatants, they are combatants of an special religious causes and while they too will rather quickly become comfortable with their prefered fighting style, fist they must understand what they fight for and that is why paladin does not get any real combat abillities at level one other than healing and why ranger gets natural explorer and favoured enemy at level 1.
Yeah with how much it is used hunters mark might as well be made into an class feature, that is simply true.
moving fighting style to level 1 makes the fighter less special for its 1st level figthing style, and makes the palladin less special by the fact that they get their fighting style last
if we want to fix ranger, moving back fighting style is not the way to go, the way to go is to make 1st level and 6th level better, i'd personally suggest you give the ranger the abillity to move stealthily at normal pace and to engage in another activity in travel while remaining alert to work in every single enviorment at level 1, give the ranger the roving variant class feature from the unearthed arcana article, keep favoured enemy as is, move favoured terrain to level 2 and possibly tie it to an small boost to the spellcasting feature (like the abillity to cast spells with an casting time of 1 action as an bonus action on the first turn of combat, or the abillity to take a second bonus action to cast a spell on the first turn of combat, only usable within favored terrain), and then at 6th level alongside favoured enemy and natural explorer improvements you also give the ranger an third feature, ether hunters mark without concentration a number of times per day equal to your wisdom modifier just like the UA or another exploration feature like the abillity to move at fast pace without incurring an penalty to passive wisdom perception scores or an boost to passive perception scores and tracking checks when moving at a slow pace, something more than just favoured enemy and natural explorer adjustments, stuff to truly make you an strong explorer
and while we are at it, we can make the level 20 capstone a little more ludicris without it having anything to do with combat, abillity to move stealthily at fast pace in any enviorment, the ranger can travel 12 hours per day without having to make constiution checks for forced march, you find three times as much food as normal when you forage, five times as much if you are in your favoured terrain, while in your favoured terrain you have the nature's ward feature against all beasts native to that favoured terrain, make the ranger an true tracker and explorer, one who is at 20th level completely unmatched, not just a dude who like is kinda good at stabbing things
also while we are at it, let's make the ranger prepare spells like the palladin, and give them "oath spells", one per level instead of two and it should be tailored for each subclass
I agree about Hunter’s Mark, that’s part of why I am so pleased with the CFVs. I also generally agree that Rangers should just automatically get Expertise in Survival. Of course, I would also take an early 1 level dip into Rogue over the Ranger Capstone for that very reason. But any player that doesn’t prioritize Wis as much as Dex will of course find Rangers lacking. When playing a Ranger, I would frequently prioritize Wis over Con. Heck, I would even look at a 1 level dip into Monk, maybe even up to 3 levels for Unarmored Movement, a couple of Ki for some shenanigans, and Kensei. To me, that’s the problem with Ranger, Multiclassing shouldn’t be objectively better than the original class. Rangers can be made better with just a few levels of almost anything.
I agree about Hunter’s Mark, that’s part of why I am so pleased with the CFVs. I also generally agree that Rangers should just automatically get Expertise in Survival. Of course, I would also take an early 1 level dip into Rogue over the Ranger Capstone for that very reason. But any player that doesn’t prioritize Wis as much as Dex will of course find Rangers lacking. When playing a Ranger, I would frequently prioritize Wis over Con. Heck, I would even look at a 1 level dip into Monk, maybe even up to 3 levels for Unarmored Movement, a couple of Ki for some shenanigans, and Kensei. To me, that’s the problem with Ranger, Multiclassing shouldn’t be objectively better than the original class. Rangers can be made better with just a few levels of almost anything.
I agree with this completely. I agree with all of it really, but this I could not agree with more.
Though we may not agree on exactly how to make Ranger better, at least we all agree that it could have been and should have been better.
I am extremely hopeful that the Variants get a second round soon or go to print. I believe it is the only way we will see an improvement in Ranger in this edition since they have already said that a revision is outside the realm of possibility.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Again, you're completely missing the point and you keep arguing the same things over and over again even though they've already been adressed. It's getting a bit silly, really. try to follow this time, please.
Again, the point that you keep failing to understand is that what makes the Ranger class one of the less good ones is not the lack of useful abilities but rather that many of the other classes simply have better abilities. The fact that some of the Ranger's abilities can be situational does not make them bad abilities. Do you not understand the difference?
That said, many of the complaints you have is not really something that has naything to do with the Ranger but rather the setting. And since the setting is all up to the DM and the players, that's not something you can blame on a class either. If a certain creature can speak common or not doesn't affect the usefulness of knowing other languages. For example, even if both you and an NPC you meet speak Common, knowing a language that the NPC does not gives you the option to communicate with other people without that NPC understanding you. Which can be very useful. Saying that languages aren't useful is like saying that Thieves' Cant isn't useful. Sure, if the DM doesn't give you chance to use it, it's useful. But as an ability of it's own it has uses.
The Paladin's healing is worthless if no-one is injured and so is the Fighter's fighting abilities if there is no-one to fight. Clerics get spellcasting because they are spellcasters, that's the whole point.
Do Rangers have a pretty crappy capstone ability? Yes. But so do Monks and Bards and they are amongst the most powerful classes in the game.
Hunter's Mark is not "more of an combat spell", it can be used both in an out of combat and there's nothing that says that you have to "cast it right as the opponent get away" for it to work. Either way, it is another way that Rangers have better tracking abilities than other classes, something that you wrongly claimed they don't.
Well, lets do some direct comparisons of level 1 abilities:.
Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer are just not good abilities. They should start with their Fighting Style at the very least.
When every class has better abilities than the Ranger, then the Ranger's abilities are bad.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
That would make them too strong for a 1 level dip
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
How often do people take a level 1 dip into Ranger?
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
well, you need to be within 90 ft of an target for hunters mark to work, and you need to see your target, and it is supposed to help you track things. If the target is in view then you probably do not need to track them, so it would be used mostly to ether pursue an fleeing target or to put it on somebody you want to follow but who you want to stay hidden from, or similar situations. survival proficiency and high wisdom scores are something any class can get, but this is unique and useful so fair point
yes, i do get what you are trying to say, abillities being situational is not exactly an bad thing, and every class will always have certain areas in whom they will excell and places where they lack, every class has its advantages and disadvantages, overall the ranger class is a fine class but in terms of these two specific class features i still disagree.
of course there exists other class features wich are specific, but these two are easily the two most situational class features in the game, and they feel kind of needlessly situational, many class features might struggle against situations meant to counteract them, but these two features stuggle in situations outside the few where they are supposed to work, they could work perfectly as so-called ribbon abillities that dont add much power and exists alongside other features to add flavour or as more general abillities, without that nessesarily making the class too powerful. Imagine that the wizard had an feature that prevented him from casting spells within 10 minutes of crossing a river, would that make the class weaker? maybe not, but it would be an kind of stupid, arbitrary and unnecessary restriction
imagine the following: natural explorer gets split up into two features: favoured terrain and natural explorer. The new feature called natural explorer only lets you travel stealthily at an normal pace and remain alert even when engaging in another activity, but it works in any terrain weras favoured terrain, the new feature gets all the benefits of old natural exploer but it works in any sort of terrain. favoured enemy and natural explorer are given out at 1st level together with the roving variant feature from that unearthed arcana article, and then your first favoured terrain is gained at level 2, and also you give some incredebly weak third feature to the ranger at level 6 like the abillity to craft nonmagiacl items faster, not much just something more than additional favoured terrain and enemy types. By doing this, you have made the class a little more versatile especially at level 1 without being significantly more powerful than any other class and without changing much. They are fine features, but they cannot carry an level on their own, again i think they should be the cherry on top of the slice of cake that is a single level of ranger, not an entire level, favored enemy and natural explorer does not need to be this restrictive, and they dont need to be the only thing you get during a single level
as for the ranger not being bad, it is just that other classes are really good? well that is simply a matter of perspective, is it not? all power is relative, if there was only one dnd class that existed in a void there would be no way for it to be ether powerful or weak, it is only when other thing exist that you can compare them that you can say one is good and that others are bad, if you agree there is an power gap then it does not really matter what you call it, it ought to be closed as best we can
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
If they got a fighting style at 1st level people would.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
They already do that with Fighter. Why would it be bad for then to do the same with Ranger? They would still have to dip 2 levels to gain access to Hunter's Mark.
Sure, they could dip 1 Fighter and 1 Ranger and have 2 Fighting Styles, but that is not exactly game breaking considering that it would take 2 levels. Heck, I would still choose dipping 1 Fighter over Ranger because Second Wind is better than both Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer on most days.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
Three words: Variant Class Features:
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
first of all the fighting style feature says as follows: "you cant take a fighting style option more than once, even if you later get to choose again", this may be interpreted as simply you not being able to take archery twice, but it can also be interpreted as you cannot have a second fighting style, even from multiclassing.
Also what would you remove at 1st level to make fighting style a 1st level choice? will it be natural explorer? will it be favoured enemy? will it be both? with the new UA that will likely become official (hopefully), you could get hunters mark at level one, that plus fighting style and why whould you even progress further in the class suddenly? also giving it at level 1 would mean you would have to give something more at 2nd level, and it would also be an huge middle finger to both the fighter and the paladin class for diffrent reasons, fighters are primarily an skilled combatant, rangers are primarily an protector of the wilderness and an combatant second, just like how the palladin works, doing that would be a massive dick move and would only serve to appease the part of the community who likes multiclassing and optimization, possibly fun but it would kinda ruin some stuff
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
also to answer your question from earlier, yeah i did manage to do the thing thanks for asking :)
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 can't honestly say I have ever heard the argument that you can't have two different Fighting Styles.
I would get rid of neither because together they make one ok ability.
I don't count the UA options as they are not as of yet a official option. However, if they do get published, then this whole discussion becomes pointless as the issue of lack luster Ranger abilities would be resolved for the most part.
As for making a 2nd level feature to replace Fighting Style, giving them a couple of Druid Cantrips would be nice and add to their versatility.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
BTW
I am not saying that these are changes the should be made. I am saying that they could have made Ranger a better class from the start without too much issue.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
No it can't. It says "even if you later get to choose again". That means that you can choose more than one as long as it is different. Also, the Champion's 10th level ability would be worthless if what you say is true.
And the reason why Rangers don't get fighting style until level 2 is to show that the Ranger has a primary focus on tracking and survival rather just fighting.
if my interpretation were true, champion fighter would still give you two fighting styles becuase specific rules beat general rules, but to be fair it is a really stupid interpretation now that i think about it so who really cares.
well i think it is partially becuase as you said the ranger has more of a focus on other things like spellcasting, tracking, combat is just one of the things the ranger can do and also it makes the fighter less special, and i wholeheartedly agree that puting it at 1st level is an bad idea
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
Not really. But yes, it is really stupid. :)
"well i think it is partially becuase as you said the ranger has more of a focus on other things like spellcasting, tracking, combat is just one of the things the ranger can do and also it makes the fighter less special, and i wholeheartedly agree that puting it at 1st level is an bad idea"
Druids are better Trackers than Rangers since they often have higher Wisdom. The Fact that Rangers have advantage in a very small number to terrains is not very impressive over all. If you wanted them to be Survival/Nature experts, they should have just given them Expertise in those Skills and been done with it. Then they would useful everywhere they go.
Fighting Style is an ability shared by 3 classes, so not really a defining feature of Fighters. Because of that, saying it would make Fighter less special is not a very good argument in my opinion.
As for Spellcasting, they are not very good at that either and I believe that is because of Hunter's Mark. Ranger is heavily dependent upon it so the first few levels, their spell slots are "reserved" for casting it.
Special Note: Hunter's Mark should have been a class feature instead of a spell similar to Hexblade's Curse.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
3 classes gain fighting style, that is correct, and rangers ******* suck at tracking compared to rouges and druids, but fighter is the only class that gains fighting style at level 1, all other half casters gain their fighting styles at level 2, that is what i meant by it would make fighters less special, they get it earlier becuase their singleminded devotion to combat and only combat means they perfect their perfered style of fighing at an earlier level than the ranger and palladin, becuase while they too are combatants, they are combatants of an special religious causes and while they too will rather quickly become comfortable with their prefered fighting style, fist they must understand what they fight for and that is why paladin does not get any real combat abillities at level one other than healing and why ranger gets natural explorer and favoured enemy at level 1.
Yeah with how much it is used hunters mark might as well be made into an class feature, that is simply true.
moving fighting style to level 1 makes the fighter less special for its 1st level figthing style, and makes the palladin less special by the fact that they get their fighting style last
if we want to fix ranger, moving back fighting style is not the way to go, the way to go is to make 1st level and 6th level better, i'd personally suggest you give the ranger the abillity to move stealthily at normal pace and to engage in another activity in travel while remaining alert to work in every single enviorment at level 1, give the ranger the roving variant class feature from the unearthed arcana article, keep favoured enemy as is, move favoured terrain to level 2 and possibly tie it to an small boost to the spellcasting feature (like the abillity to cast spells with an casting time of 1 action as an bonus action on the first turn of combat, or the abillity to take a second bonus action to cast a spell on the first turn of combat, only usable within favored terrain), and then at 6th level alongside favoured enemy and natural explorer improvements you also give the ranger an third feature, ether hunters mark without concentration a number of times per day equal to your wisdom modifier just like the UA or another exploration feature like the abillity to move at fast pace without incurring an penalty to passive wisdom perception scores or an boost to passive perception scores and tracking checks when moving at a slow pace, something more than just favoured enemy and natural explorer adjustments, stuff to truly make you an strong explorer
and while we are at it, we can make the level 20 capstone a little more ludicris without it having anything to do with combat, abillity to move stealthily at fast pace in any enviorment, the ranger can travel 12 hours per day without having to make constiution checks for forced march, you find three times as much food as normal when you forage, five times as much if you are in your favoured terrain, while in your favoured terrain you have the nature's ward feature against all beasts native to that favoured terrain, make the ranger an true tracker and explorer, one who is at 20th level completely unmatched, not just a dude who like is kinda good at stabbing things
also while we are at it, let's make the ranger prepare spells like the palladin, and give them "oath spells", one per level instead of two and it should be tailored for each subclass
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 agree about Hunter’s Mark, that’s part of why I am so pleased with the CFVs. I also generally agree that Rangers should just automatically get Expertise in Survival. Of course, I would also take an early 1 level dip into Rogue over the Ranger Capstone for that very reason. But any player that doesn’t prioritize Wis as much as Dex will of course find Rangers lacking. When playing a Ranger, I would frequently prioritize Wis over Con. Heck, I would even look at a 1 level dip into Monk, maybe even up to 3 levels for Unarmored Movement, a couple of Ki for some shenanigans, and Kensei. To me, that’s the problem with Ranger, Multiclassing shouldn’t be objectively better than the original class. Rangers can be made better with just a few levels of almost anything.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
I agree with this completely. I agree with all of it really, but this I could not agree with more.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
Though we may not agree on exactly how to make Ranger better, at least we all agree that it could have been and should have been better.
I am extremely hopeful that the Variants get a second round soon or go to print. I believe it is the only way we will see an improvement in Ranger in this edition since they have already said that a revision is outside the realm of possibility.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master