I said that beastmasters have a lot of trap options that can hinder the person who picked them. At least many people have said that, I personally have not played one.
Edit: Not that all options they have are bad, obviously they have several good options too. Just that it might be hard to tell which options are good and which ones aren't.
I said that beastmasters have a lot of trap options that can hinder the person who picked them. At least many people have said that, I personally have not played one.
Edit: Not that all options they have are bad, obviously they have several good options too. Just that it might be hard to tell which options are good and which ones aren't.
I’m sorry. I jumped the gun with my response. I’m very defensive about PHB rangers, and beast masters in particular.
Beast master ranger who has a wolf (alive) and shoots arrows does very comparable damage compared to the warlock shooting eldritch blast with agonizing blast. Ranger is slightly lower through most of the game. If the ranger takes sharpshooter, ranger wins by a little.
Wolf, blood hawk, snakes, spider, giant crab, panther, giant frog, just from the monster manual, all do really well.
The average ranged damage for fighters (19), rogues (26), warlocks (28), barbarians (15), and paladins (18) at level 10 is what, like 21.2? Give or take. A ranger does 26 with the animal just standing there.
The average ranged damage for fighters (28.5), rogues (29.5), warlocks (42), barbarians (15), and paladins (27) at level 11 is what, like 28.4? Give or take. With the animal attacking the ranger does 35 (wolf), 32 (panther), 30 (giant frog), or 30 (blood hawk).
Average ranged damage for a barbarian and paladin? Interesting... (All Paladin features explicitly call out a "melee weapon" lol, and Barbarians call out a "melee weapon attack"/"melee attack". Although like one or two Paladin smite spells do work with ranged weapons.)
Joking aside yeah those numbers look right.
It is worth noting that these conditions are favoring the ranger somewhat, fighter subclasses tend to add around on average another attack worth of damage, and ignoring AC and the such, but it gets the point across that rangers are fairly average in terms of damage if mastered. As I said, ranger isn't bad by any means, just average damage for the amount of work you have to put in.
That seem to say more about sharpshooter than it does about the ranger class. It my opinion the class was rushed thru and in the desire to not step on toes is poorly implemented. It has already been noted that many baseline feature are situational to the point of being ribbons. That and the overcaution with concentration and or use of bonus actions, just feels off. Maybe it is an incompatible with the general class fantasy with the design focus of the designers.
That seem to say more about sharpshooter than it does about the ranger class. It my opinion the class was rushed thru and in the desire to not step on toes is poorly implemented. It has already been noted that many baseline feature are situational to the point of being ribbons. That and the overcaution with concentration and or use of bonus actions, just feels off. Maybe it is an incompatible with the general class fantasy with the design focus of the designers.
None of those numbers above involve sharpshooter.
I wasn’t involved with the D&D Next play test, but I have a link to the packets online, and it does seem that the ranger was never really sorted out even up until the very last packet. Personally, I think what we ended up with in the PHB wasn’t even written by the same folks that wrote most of the other classes and subclasses.
What do all of you think about the UA optional variant ranger class features? The book was apparently leaked (although I haven't seen it). From what I've read about the leak, the UA variant features for the Ranger are pretty close to what is coming in Tashas. It's not a replacement for ranger features so those of you that like the ranger features as is can keep it. I think every class is getting optional variant rules. It's probably not worth digging into a ton until it comes out and we actually for sure know the new options. I thought it was worth discussing though.
Here are the supposed differences between what's coming in Tasha's and the UA:
Deft explorer (replacement for Natural Explorer). Instead of choosing one of the options at levels 1,6, an d10th level, you get basically the same thing at specific levels. Canny at first level, Roving at 6, and Tireless at 10. Roving didn't mention it was removing climb or swim speed but what I read didn't mention it. So who knows.
Favored foe (replacement for favored enemy) now works with foe slayer explicitly. No longer just gives hunters mark without concentration. It marks an enemy as favored foe when you hit it. You gain some benefits as well as a little added damage the first time you hit it on a turn that increase as you gain levels. It also has limited uses.
New Fighting Styles. From what I read, Druidic Warrior is staying, and the Ranger is also gaining Blind Fighting (Blindsight 10 ft) and Thrown Weapon Fighting.
New Beast Master pet options are staying. It looks like they're going unchanged from the UA. Also adding a Beast of the Sea. I didn't see a stat block for it.
Nature's Veil (I think replaces hide in plane sight but it didn't say that). Bonus action become invisible until start of next turn. Limited uses based on proficiency bonus.
I wonder if they did anything to make tireless a feature worthwhile at level 10 and beyond or is it going the way of most high level ranger features and be underwhelming.
It does seem that for some reason they like toying with spells as features (without changing spellcasting "weight" in design) only to back away at the last moment. Only the general "can't have nice thing approach" will keep ranger from being a full caster (i.e. like the bard did) in some future addition. Though (off-topic sorry) a ranger modeled mechanically more closely to the warlock could be a interesting method of rework.
I wouldn't say that Tireless is not worthwhile. It's not awful. Granted, when you're running around with 150+ hit points at the highest levels, another 5-15 isn't a ton. Still, it's free. You can do it out of combat and it lasts until it doesn't. However, at level 10 when you get it, another 5-15 when you are sitting around 80-100 is going to be a fair amount.
Getting rid of exhaustion on the other hand situationally amazing. If you're in a campaign where exhaustion comes up a lot, or are a Berserker Barbarian, being able to get rid one exhaustion on a short rest is very strong.
It’s official. Tasha’s only replaces the level 3 ability for the beast master. That means the level 7, 11, and 15 subclass abilities are unchanged. that means the beast and ranger combined are making 4 attacks at level 11! Average of 44 damage a turn.
Rapier Ranger = +9 to hit and (d8 + 2 +5)*2 damage
Beast of Land = +7 to hit and (d8 + 2 + 4)*2
The beast of the land also has a 20’ extra d6 damage and knock down effect. Plus AoO.
It’s an optional replacement. It’s an option that replaces the 3rd level ability. I used this words on purpose as there is no replacement for levels 7, 11, and 15 in the optional book. Sheesh.
It’s an optional replacement. It’s an option that replaces the 3rd level ability. I used this words on purpose as there is no replacement for levels 7, 11, and 15 in the optional book. Sheesh.
Maybe it's a review copy, but I'm still leery of looking at anything before the legal street date. People are either already committed to getting it or they're not.
And, perhaps more to the point, all of the speculation and discussion over what may or may not be in the book is ultimately pointless. It kills time. Nothing more. It's, honestly, annoying and speaks ill of a culture which demands constant speculation and engagement. It was old hat when the 24-hour news cycle began 30 years ago. And now we have multiple threads on rumors about a book that was already thoroughly edited and sent to the printers. It's asinine.
Want to know how something works? The DM decides. It's the only answer that matters.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I said that beastmasters have a lot of trap options that can hinder the person who picked them. At least many people have said that, I personally have not played one.
Edit: Not that all options they have are bad, obviously they have several good options too. Just that it might be hard to tell which options are good and which ones aren't.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
I’m sorry. I jumped the gun with my response. I’m very defensive about PHB rangers, and beast masters in particular.
Beast master ranger who has a wolf (alive) and shoots arrows does very comparable damage compared to the warlock shooting eldritch blast with agonizing blast. Ranger is slightly lower through most of the game. If the ranger takes sharpshooter, ranger wins by a little.
Yeah!
Wolf, blood hawk, snakes, spider, giant crab, panther, giant frog, just from the monster manual, all do really well.
The average ranged damage for fighters (19), rogues (26), warlocks (28), barbarians (15), and paladins (18) at level 10 is what, like 21.2? Give or take. A ranger does 26 with the animal just standing there.
The average ranged damage for fighters (28.5), rogues (29.5), warlocks (42), barbarians (15), and paladins (27) at level 11 is what, like 28.4? Give or take. With the animal attacking the ranger does 35 (wolf), 32 (panther), 30 (giant frog), or 30 (blood hawk).
Average ranged damage for a barbarian and paladin? Interesting... (All Paladin features explicitly call out a "melee weapon" lol, and Barbarians call out a "melee weapon attack"/"melee attack". Although like one or two Paladin smite spells do work with ranged weapons.)
Joking aside yeah those numbers look right.
It is worth noting that these conditions are favoring the ranger somewhat, fighter subclasses tend to add around on average another attack worth of damage, and ignoring AC and the such, but it gets the point across that rangers are fairly average in terms of damage if mastered. As I said, ranger isn't bad by any means, just average damage for the amount of work you have to put in.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
Oh sure. It’s just some BS numbers. LOL!
That seem to say more about sharpshooter than it does about the ranger class. It my opinion the class was rushed thru and in the desire to not step on toes is poorly implemented. It has already been noted that many baseline feature are situational to the point of being ribbons. That and the overcaution with concentration and or use of bonus actions, just feels off. Maybe it is an incompatible with the general class fantasy with the design focus of the designers.
None of those numbers above involve sharpshooter.
I wasn’t involved with the D&D Next play test, but I have a link to the packets online, and it does seem that the ranger was never really sorted out even up until the very last packet. Personally, I think what we ended up with in the PHB wasn’t even written by the same folks that wrote most of the other classes and subclasses.
I was responding to Lehrar's commit on how the beast master ranger is a little behind the warlock without sharpshooter and little ahead with it.
Ah. Sorry. That makes more sense.
What do all of you think about the UA optional variant ranger class features? The book was apparently leaked (although I haven't seen it). From what I've read about the leak, the UA variant features for the Ranger are pretty close to what is coming in Tashas. It's not a replacement for ranger features so those of you that like the ranger features as is can keep it. I think every class is getting optional variant rules. It's probably not worth digging into a ton until it comes out and we actually for sure know the new options. I thought it was worth discussing though.
Here is a link to the UA PDF. I don't have a link to any leaked info but it's all over the internet.
Here are the supposed differences between what's coming in Tasha's and the UA:
Any thoughts?
I wonder if they did anything to make tireless a feature worthwhile at level 10 and beyond or is it going the way of most high level ranger features and be underwhelming.
It does seem that for some reason they like toying with spells as features (without changing spellcasting "weight" in design) only to back away at the last moment. Only the general "can't have nice thing approach" will keep ranger from being a full caster (i.e. like the bard did) in some future addition. Though (off-topic sorry) a ranger modeled mechanically more closely to the warlock could be a interesting method of rework.
I wouldn't say that Tireless is not worthwhile. It's not awful. Granted, when you're running around with 150+ hit points at the highest levels, another 5-15 isn't a ton. Still, it's free. You can do it out of combat and it lasts until it doesn't. However, at level 10 when you get it, another 5-15 when you are sitting around 80-100 is going to be a fair amount.
Getting rid of exhaustion on the other hand situationally amazing. If you're in a campaign where exhaustion comes up a lot, or are a Berserker Barbarian, being able to get rid one exhaustion on a short rest is very strong.
Until we see the finished product I would not be surprised if the exhaustion removal is removed or limited to once per long rest.
The supposed change is hat the exhaustion removal now requires level 10. So not really useful for berserker barbarian.
It’s official. Tasha’s only replaces the level 3 ability for the beast master. That means the level 7, 11, and 15 subclass abilities are unchanged. that means the beast and ranger combined are making 4 attacks at level 11! Average of 44 damage a turn.
Rapier Ranger = +9 to hit and (d8 + 2 +5)*2 damage
Beast of Land = +7 to hit and (d8 + 2 + 4)*2
The beast of the land also has a 20’ extra d6 damage and knock down effect. Plus AoO.
It's not a replacement, it's an option. And give citations.
In other words, pics or it didn't happen.
It’s an optional replacement. It’s an option that replaces the 3rd level ability. I used this words on purpose as there is no replacement for levels 7, 11, and 15 in the optional book. Sheesh.
https://youtu.be/HcwH2Qf7AlI
Maybe it's a review copy, but I'm still leery of looking at anything before the legal street date. People are either already committed to getting it or they're not.
And, perhaps more to the point, all of the speculation and discussion over what may or may not be in the book is ultimately pointless. It kills time. Nothing more. It's, honestly, annoying and speaks ill of a culture which demands constant speculation and engagement. It was old hat when the 24-hour news cycle began 30 years ago. And now we have multiple threads on rumors about a book that was already thoroughly edited and sent to the printers. It's asinine.
Want to know how something works? The DM decides. It's the only answer that matters.