Seems like it shouldn't be too hard to create alternate versions of the Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer features that can be swapped out, possibly other core Ranger features too(I haven't looked at those as closely). Dealing with the issue of which subclasses get Extra Attack shouldn't be too hard since every subclass except the Revised Beastmaster gets it. They could re-word it so the Revised Beastmaster can give up one attack to let the beast make its reaction attack.
I don't understand why they seem to be reversing course on this, especially since it doesn't seem terribly difficult to do. They talked about a lack of interest from players, but maybe that has to do with how long it's been since they've discussed it. They way they were talking about it last year, they seemed quite definite about returning to it soon.
It's really sad to see everyone turning their back on the revised ranger, especially when the minor changes they did actually brought out the real nature of the class into light. As it is the PHB ranger requires a lot of metagaming from the player and DM when creating the character in order to pick FT and FE that will be encountered in the campaign... otherwise it becomes pretty much useless an obsolete. Just the fact that the revised Ranger allowed all of the creatures listed under Humanoids to count (instead of just pick two) helped make the ranger relevant--regardless of what path they decided to take on level 3.
As it stands though homebrew content only allows you to create subclasses, not revise the core of a class, so unless someone does a revised ranger subclass for every path it seems unlikely to put it in use on DnD Beyond... which is saddening because I love how I can use everything in this site when playing with friends. Really think they should consider adding it as a separate class in the site (I would even pay to unlock it honestly) so those that truly want to use it can.
Really think they should consider adding it as a separate class in the site (I would even pay to unlock it honestly) so those that truly want to use it can.
As per previous posts, it's not the staff at D&D Beyond that you need to convince - it's entirely up to Wizards of the Coast what official content is released.
It's really sad to see everyone turning their back on the revised ranger, especially when the minor changes they did actually brought out the real nature of the class into light.
Curious minds inquiring. What's the real nature of the class, in your opinion, and how was it brought out. Not trying to argue, but mostly just curious.
Really think they should consider adding it as a separate class in the site (I would even pay to unlock it honestly) so those that truly want to use it can.
As per previous posts, it's not the staff at D&D Beyond that you need to convince - it's entirely up to Wizards of the Coast what official content is released.
It was literally created by Wizards of the Coast; this isn't a revised ranger some random fan created. Pretty official to me. :\
If not then DnD Beyond should at least allow us to homebrew a class, just like we can homebrew subclasses. It's not like it'd be a terrible thing to add, considering everything is already there, and I already pay a monthly subscription to be able to add and create homebrew content anyways.
Really think they should consider adding it as a separate class in the site (I would even pay to unlock it honestly) so those that truly want to use it can.
As per previous posts, it's not the staff at D&D Beyond that you need to convince - it's entirely up to Wizards of the Coast what official content is released.
It was literally created by Wizards of the Coast; this isn't a revised ranger some random fan created. Pretty official to me. :\
If not then DnD Beyond should at least allow us to homebrew a class, just like we can homebrew subclasses. It's not like it'd be a terrible thing to add, considering everything is already there, and I already pay a monthly subscription to be able to add and create homebrew content anyways.
The only ones deciding what is official and what is not are the people at WotC, and they specifically said that everything coming in UA is playtest material, and not official until published in an official book or specifically announced as official.
As to the possibility of creating classes, the DDB staff has already explained several times that right now that option is a no-go, due to the problems related to granting access to the classes creator tools to users, which could create several problems in the back of the website. It is not a definite "no, never gonna happen", but it also not something they are actively working on right now.
With the subscription you pay for what the site offers right now, not for what it will offer or what you would like it to offer. A case could be made that the subscription is also an investment on the future of the website, and that is not incorrect, but requesting something they already explained is not coming any time soon for various reasons because you are "already paying a monthly subscription" is not really the best argumentation, imho.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
It's really sad to see everyone turning their back on the revised ranger, especially when the minor changes they did actually brought out the real nature of the class into light.
Curious minds inquiring. What's the real nature of the class, in your opinion, and how was it brought out. Not trying to argue, but mostly just curious.
((Apologies in advance for the rambling, it's a lot of thoughts to condense :'D))
For me when I thought about a ranger from the very beginning I imagined someone good at tracking and hunting in the wilderness. Someone in tune with nature, especially those places prob close to home (your FT picks), and knowlegeable about the dnagers about and how to deal with them (your FE picks). All of this, ofc, gatehred through years of practice, training,e tc.
Unfortunately the current PHB ranger doesn't really reflect this aside from adv on certain rolls for tracking or info--which more often than not will be flavor more than anything else in campaigns and can quickly become obsolete if the "wrong" FE is picked. When it comes to combat the class pales in comparison to many other classes; even when it's on it's supposedly favorite terrain. For me at least the revised version took care of these things well; it gave the ranger just enough to highlight those details that make a ranger without making it OP either and throwing every other balance into chaos.
As it stands with the PHB Ranger the only way you can capitalize with it is if you metagame with the DM before hand so you're aware of what type of monsters you'll be likely to face--especially when it comes to humanoids. On the PHB you can only pick two out of a looong list--even if you use all your future level ups to add FE fromt he humanoids list you'll never be able to have them all--when in reality these monsters are not really so different as to warrant having to pick and choose.
Compare Gnolls with any of the werebeasts in that list for example, tracking one isn't too different from the other and neither are weaknesses. If you don't want to metagame you run the risk of picking FE that you might never come across in the campaign--essentially just becoming a glorified guide (if you're in your FT) and walking food supply (if you picked Outlander for background) for the adventuring party and nothing else.
Just allowing the revised Ranger access to all humanoids was--to me at least--a vast improvement. There's a high chance you'll come across at least one of them in campaigns, which means you'll have some relevance through the adventure without having to emtagame before hand and adjsut your character's history to whatever monster setting the DM is planning on using for your run. The small boost to damage was good too when it comes to FE, since it helps highlight that through your knowledge and years of trainning to track and know the weaknesses of these foes you can make a litle bit more damage on them as a result.
Likewise the advantage on initiative rolls when on your favored terrain gave it a bit more meaning than just flavor and being a guide, it makes sense that a ranger in their innate or favored area would be able to quickly find or position themselves into good spots for fighting etc. And that single advantage against a creature that hasn't moved yet on your first turn helps also reflect those years of training for the ranger.
Really think they should consider adding it as a separate class in the site (I would even pay to unlock it honestly) so those that truly want to use it can.
As per previous posts, it's not the staff at D&D Beyond that you need to convince - it's entirely up to Wizards of the Coast what official content is released.
It was literally created by Wizards of the Coast; this isn't a revised ranger some random fan created. Pretty official to me. :\
If not then DnD Beyond should at least allow us to homebrew a class, just like we can homebrew subclasses. It's not like it'd be a terrible thing to add, considering everything is already there, and I already pay a monthly subscription to be able to add and create homebrew content anyways.
The only ones deciding what is official and what is not are the people at WotC, and they specifically said that everything coming in UA is playtest material, and not official until published in an official book or specifically announced as official.
As to the possibility of creating classes, the DDB staff has already explained several times that right now that option is a no-go, due to the problems related to granting access to the classes creator tools to users, which could create several problems in the back of the website. It is not a definite "no, never gonna happen", but it also not something they are actively working on right now.
With the subscription you pay for what the site offers right now, not for what it will offer or what you would like it to offer. A case could be made that the subscription is also an investment on the future of the website, and that is not incorrect, but requesting something they already explained is not coming any time soon for various reasons because you are "already paying a monthly subscription" is not really the best argumentation, imho.
I did not know they had stated before that it's a no-go for now due to those reasons, if it can create back end problems currently that I can totally understand.
Again, I'm not demanding they add something because I pay a subscription (I pay it because I want to use the things already given) but this is just my feedback and opinion as to how things could be resolved. If the issue is that WotC doesn't consider the revised Ranger as official (even though they made it) enough to be allowed on DnD Beyond then a possible alternate for users to make it as a homebrew content at some point would be nice.
If a way can be figured out a way to allow people to homebrew their revised ranger, without breaking the site ofc, I think that would be a boon instead or a negative in the future for the DnD Beyond as well; and no doubt perhaps convince more people to subscribe. Personally my reason to subscribe was to be able to add homebrew content from other people into my sheets.
If there would be blank classes to homebrew off of (just hp, no proficiencies or class abilities)with subclass selection on lvl 1 i think we could build the revised ranger using just the subclass tools. Wich i think would fill the gap untill class homebrewing becomes an option....
Add me to the list of fans that are very disappointed, and sorta shocked, that the revised ranger cannot be created. Really sucks that the beloved ranger class is hobbled in the RAW and that the company's own proffered fix is not available as an option here. I'm starting a new campaign, with all-new players and was really excited to find the revised ranger only wait — several years on and still no official support. C'mon, WotC...
At some point in the future (no ETA) you will be able to create full base classes here in DDB, which will allow everyone interested to re-creating the revised Ranger for their (and their group's) personal use. Unless, of course, WotC moves on with what they said could be their preferred way of addressing stuff like this, and that would be modular class features instead of fully revised version of classes.
Why do Rangers get so little love from the developers...
That's a great question and one I ask myself all the time. Especially when the All-Singing, All-Dancing Artificer comes out (and is accessible on DDB) with a homunculus companion that is far superior in most every way to the PHB Beast Master. It's a real drag. I almost feel like WotC are getting so much pressure on this, and it was clearly very evident how the community felt about the ranger's relative power/effectiveness in their last survey, that they don't know where to start. The answer is right in front of our faces though. Mike Mearls did some great work recently in his Happy Fun Hour, spending two sessions looking at alternate class features for the ranger and doing so in a way that maintains the integrity of the PHB class. It just gives you choices on Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer, allowing you to opt for the versions in PHB or new revised alternates. It also goes on to allow for rangers to swap out their spell casting class feature for either combat manoeuvres (a la Battle Master, but streamlined) or an enhanced animal companion. To me, it seemed 80% finished. I took the liberty of trying to put it all together as a working example, adding in a couple of elements from Unearthed Arcana. You can check it out here if you like: https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-L_S_F4wZF9yza6ZOCjd …
In general it seems interesting, though it is a bit disjointed in its write up, not everything is clear, in particular...
Gift of the Wild Option 2: Wild Companion
(Source: HFH) Some rangers develop a bond with the spirit of Nature in the form of a wild beast, and further strengthen that bond by tapping into the inherent magic of Nature herself. If you select this option, see details for the Wild Companion in the next section.
</section>
You then have a section on choosing Wild Companion and Beast Master, but there is nothing about selecting Wild Companion without BM?
Thanks for your reply. Can you see page 4 where you have Gift of the Wild Option 1: Mighty Slayer in the left column, and Gift of the Wild Option 2: Wild Companion, in the right column? That is what it is referring to. you can definitely select Wild Companion without BM, in which case you would simply follow the rules on left column of page 5 based on which archetype you go for. I am sorry if this is not clear! if you have some ideas for wording that tracks it better pls let me know and I'll make the change. Cheers!
Yes, in which he says they considering alternate class features for multiple classes but nothing is in development...We'll see I suppose.
Perpetually annoyed that Eldritch Knights can't use Eldritch Blast, Eldritch Smite, and Eldritch Sight.
Why do Rangers get so little love from the developers...
Seems like it shouldn't be too hard to create alternate versions of the Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer features that can be swapped out, possibly other core Ranger features too(I haven't looked at those as closely). Dealing with the issue of which subclasses get Extra Attack shouldn't be too hard since every subclass except the Revised Beastmaster gets it. They could re-word it so the Revised Beastmaster can give up one attack to let the beast make its reaction attack.
I don't understand why they seem to be reversing course on this, especially since it doesn't seem terribly difficult to do. They talked about a lack of interest from players, but maybe that has to do with how long it's been since they've discussed it. They way they were talking about it last year, they seemed quite definite about returning to it soon.
It's really sad to see everyone turning their back on the revised ranger, especially when the minor changes they did actually brought out the real nature of the class into light. As it is the PHB ranger requires a lot of metagaming from the player and DM when creating the character in order to pick FT and FE that will be encountered in the campaign... otherwise it becomes pretty much useless an obsolete. Just the fact that the revised Ranger allowed all of the creatures listed under Humanoids to count (instead of just pick two) helped make the ranger relevant--regardless of what path they decided to take on level 3.
As it stands though homebrew content only allows you to create subclasses, not revise the core of a class, so unless someone does a revised ranger subclass for every path it seems unlikely to put it in use on DnD Beyond... which is saddening because I love how I can use everything in this site when playing with friends. Really think they should consider adding it as a separate class in the site (I would even pay to unlock it honestly) so those that truly want to use it can.
Homebrew FAQs: FAQ, 101, 102, Snippets, Tooltips, Rollables
As per previous posts, it's not the staff at D&D Beyond that you need to convince - it's entirely up to Wizards of the Coast what official content is released.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
Curious minds inquiring. What's the real nature of the class, in your opinion, and how was it brought out. Not trying to argue, but mostly just curious.
It was literally created by Wizards of the Coast; this isn't a revised ranger some random fan created. Pretty official to me. :\
If not then DnD Beyond should at least allow us to homebrew a class, just like we can homebrew subclasses. It's not like it'd be a terrible thing to add, considering everything is already there, and I already pay a monthly subscription to be able to add and create homebrew content anyways.
Homebrew FAQs: FAQ, 101, 102, Snippets, Tooltips, Rollables
The only ones deciding what is official and what is not are the people at WotC, and they specifically said that everything coming in UA is playtest material, and not official until published in an official book or specifically announced as official.
As to the possibility of creating classes, the DDB staff has already explained several times that right now that option is a no-go, due to the problems related to granting access to the classes creator tools to users, which could create several problems in the back of the website.
It is not a definite "no, never gonna happen", but it also not something they are actively working on right now.
With the subscription you pay for what the site offers right now, not for what it will offer or what you would like it to offer. A case could be made that the subscription is also an investment on the future of the website, and that is not incorrect, but requesting something they already explained is not coming any time soon for various reasons because you are "already paying a monthly subscription" is not really the best argumentation, imho.
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
((Apologies in advance for the rambling, it's a lot of thoughts to condense :'D))
For me when I thought about a ranger from the very beginning I imagined someone good at tracking and hunting in the wilderness. Someone in tune with nature, especially those places prob close to home (your FT picks), and knowlegeable about the dnagers about and how to deal with them (your FE picks). All of this, ofc, gatehred through years of practice, training,e tc.
Unfortunately the current PHB ranger doesn't really reflect this aside from adv on certain rolls for tracking or info--which more often than not will be flavor more than anything else in campaigns and can quickly become obsolete if the "wrong" FE is picked. When it comes to combat the class pales in comparison to many other classes; even when it's on it's supposedly favorite terrain. For me at least the revised version took care of these things well; it gave the ranger just enough to highlight those details that make a ranger without making it OP either and throwing every other balance into chaos.
As it stands with the PHB Ranger the only way you can capitalize with it is if you metagame with the DM before hand so you're aware of what type of monsters you'll be likely to face--especially when it comes to humanoids. On the PHB you can only pick two out of a looong list--even if you use all your future level ups to add FE fromt he humanoids list you'll never be able to have them all--when in reality these monsters are not really so different as to warrant having to pick and choose.
Compare Gnolls with any of the werebeasts in that list for example, tracking one isn't too different from the other and neither are weaknesses. If you don't want to metagame you run the risk of picking FE that you might never come across in the campaign--essentially just becoming a glorified guide (if you're in your FT) and walking food supply (if you picked Outlander for background) for the adventuring party and nothing else.
Just allowing the revised Ranger access to all humanoids was--to me at least--a vast improvement. There's a high chance you'll come across at least one of them in campaigns, which means you'll have some relevance through the adventure without having to emtagame before hand and adjsut your character's history to whatever monster setting the DM is planning on using for your run. The small boost to damage was good too when it comes to FE, since it helps highlight that through your knowledge and years of trainning to track and know the weaknesses of these foes you can make a litle bit more damage on them as a result.
Likewise the advantage on initiative rolls when on your favored terrain gave it a bit more meaning than just flavor and being a guide, it makes sense that a ranger in their innate or favored area would be able to quickly find or position themselves into good spots for fighting etc. And that single advantage against a creature that hasn't moved yet on your first turn helps also reflect those years of training for the ranger.
Homebrew FAQs: FAQ, 101, 102, Snippets, Tooltips, Rollables
I did not know they had stated before that it's a no-go for now due to those reasons, if it can create back end problems currently that I can totally understand.
Again, I'm not demanding they add something because I pay a subscription (I pay it because I want to use the things already given) but this is just my feedback and opinion as to how things could be resolved. If the issue is that WotC doesn't consider the revised Ranger as official (even though they made it) enough to be allowed on DnD Beyond then a possible alternate for users to make it as a homebrew content at some point would be nice.
If a way can be figured out a way to allow people to homebrew their revised ranger, without breaking the site ofc, I think that would be a boon instead or a negative in the future for the DnD Beyond as well; and no doubt perhaps convince more people to subscribe. Personally my reason to subscribe was to be able to add homebrew content from other people into my sheets.
Homebrew FAQs: FAQ, 101, 102, Snippets, Tooltips, Rollables
Thank you for the response.
If there would be blank classes to homebrew off of (just hp, no proficiencies or class abilities)with subclass selection on lvl 1 i think we could build the revised ranger using just the subclass tools. Wich i think would fill the gap untill class homebrewing becomes an option....
I think it is somewhere in this thread, or maybe another that describes setting up a subclass, which I have done to get the "revised" ranger into ddb.
https://ddb.ac/characters/4243155/ZmnD31
The * version of the feature is what you use, ignoring the standard version. You have to be at least 3rd level, but it works.
Add me to the list of fans that are very disappointed, and sorta shocked, that the revised ranger cannot be created. Really sucks that the beloved ranger class is hobbled in the RAW and that the company's own proffered fix is not available as an option here. I'm starting a new campaign, with all-new players and was really excited to find the revised ranger only wait — several years on and still no official support. C'mon, WotC...
Agreed I really wish the UA Ranger would get another serious look. The Class could most definitely would benefit from it.
At some point in the future (no ETA) you will be able to create full base classes here in DDB, which will allow everyone interested to re-creating the revised Ranger for their (and their group's) personal use. Unless, of course, WotC moves on with what they said could be their preferred way of addressing stuff like this, and that would be modular class features instead of fully revised version of classes.
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
I've said it before, they should add it hear and use that to gauge how many people are using it and use that to decide to go forward.
That's a great question and one I ask myself all the time. Especially when the All-Singing, All-Dancing Artificer comes out (and is accessible on DDB) with a homunculus companion that is far superior in most every way to the PHB Beast Master. It's a real drag. I almost feel like WotC are getting so much pressure on this, and it was clearly very evident how the community felt about the ranger's relative power/effectiveness in their last survey, that they don't know where to start. The answer is right in front of our faces though. Mike Mearls did some great work recently in his Happy Fun Hour, spending two sessions looking at alternate class features for the ranger and doing so in a way that maintains the integrity of the PHB class. It just gives you choices on Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer, allowing you to opt for the versions in PHB or new revised alternates. It also goes on to allow for rangers to swap out their spell casting class feature for either combat manoeuvres (a la Battle Master, but streamlined) or an enhanced animal companion. To me, it seemed 80% finished. I took the liberty of trying to put it all together as a working example, adding in a couple of elements from Unearthed Arcana. You can check it out here if you like: https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-L_S_F4wZF9yza6ZOCjd …
---
Don't be Lawful Evil
#OpenDND
You then have a section on choosing Wild Companion and Beast Master, but there is nothing about selecting Wild Companion without BM?
Thanks for your reply. Can you see page 4 where you have Gift of the Wild Option 1: Mighty Slayer in the left column, and Gift of the Wild Option 2: Wild Companion, in the right column? That is what it is referring to. you can definitely select Wild Companion without BM, in which case you would simply follow the rules on left column of page 5 based on which archetype you go for. I am sorry if this is not clear! if you have some ideas for wording that tracks it better pls let me know and I'll make the change. Cheers!
---
Don't be Lawful Evil
#OpenDND