With two weapon fighting I'd still rather use Hunter's Mark to be honest. There'd be no real loss of damage for the first round and from the second round on you have up to three chances to trigger Hunter's Mark while with Favoured Foe you can make your BA attack in the first round but only get to trigger the puny 1d4/1d6/1d8 damage once per round regardless of the number of hits.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I've never encountered a forum where I got this many "talking to a wall" impressions as this one...
I posted this but this thread has more traction so I am pasting my thoughts here...
There are dozens of pages and thousands of discussions about the Ranger pros and cons. Pretty much a universal con though is the fact that all of their best spell options are concentration. The class variant features offered a fix for this, but in classic Wizards fashion, took it a bit too far, and made it a bit too powerful. Now thanks to leaks of the book, we pretty much have confirmed that they did replace Favored Enemy with Favored Foe, but we also know that they just made Favored Enemy look like a pretty solid feature, so good job I guess?
Favored foe will let you mark an enemy for 1 minute or until you loose concentration, to deal 1 time per turn a d4 until level 6 when it becomes a d6 and a d8 at 14. Who is going to give up Hunter's Mark for this? I hope the info I saw is wrong and it doesn't require concentration, because if it does - congratulations Wizards, you took the one thing people already universally hate about the Ranger and ADDED to it.
Who else thinks this sounds like a useless option no one will take?
A better option would have been to keep favored enemy as is but let you choose three options each time you got to select it (ultimately letting you have 12/14 of the options) and add...
You can use Hunter’s Mark on a favored Enemy without concentration a number of times up to your wisdom modifier per long rest.
You incentivize actually caring about favored enemy choice, you free up concentration some, but not all of the time, and you give reason to stay in Ranger to unlock more options.
1st-level ranger feature, which replaces the Favored Enemy feature and works with the Foe Slayer feature
When you hit a creature with an attack roll, you can call on your mystical bond with nature to mark the target as your favored enemy for 1 minute or until you lose your concentration (as if you were concentrating on a spell)
The first time on each of your turns that you hit the favored enemy and deal damage to it, including when you mark it, you can increase that damage by 1d4.
You can use this feature to mark a favored enemy a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest.
This feature's extra damage increases when you reach certain levels in this class: to 1d6 at 6th level and to 1d8 at 14th level.
This is definitely an improvement from Favored Enemy, but it doesn't improve rangers a whole ton. I definitely wish that rangers could get hunter's mark for free like the Favored Foe CFV UA. This basically is a worse hunter's mark for free, still with concentration, but it scales slowly to higher damage.
It can work in conjunction with Hunter's Mark, essentially giving you free damage when you don't want to use the spell slots or might need them for other things. If they were going to do it this way, it would have been nice to allow the Ranger to concentrate on a Ranger Spell so that the Ranger could keep Fog Cloud or Ensnaring Strike up while benefiting from Hunter's Mark lite. Having the concentration work with Ranger spells does prevent the Hex/Hunter's Mark combination, which was likely a concern with the UA version.
The damage buffs are set so that many MC builds won't be able to take advantage of them while the number of uses will continue to scale with character level.
For people who find no value in Favored Enemy, this seems like it's a good step up, particularly if DMs allow other Ranger spells to be concentrated while using this.
The beast master, horizon walker, and monster slayer subclasses will make great use of favored foe as they all have abilities that make less use of, or directly compete with, hunter’s mark, unlike the hunter and gloom stalker subclasses with will use it as well as ever. Mathematically the two weapon fighting ranger will make better use of favored foe than hunter’s mark as well. That “mini game” is similar to the warlock with hex dealing “big damage”. The bonus action cost cuts down the damage output when killing enemies with hits.
It also works well in many ways as, 1. it’s not a spell, so rage works with it, 2. casting and hitting with a spell like hail of thorns and then using this for the second attack in the same turn works well (and hits harder than hunter’s mark), 3. no magic suppression, counter spell, or spell slot uses, 4. relies on proficiency bonus so you can still play a low wisdom ranger, 5. scales (appropriately) for two weapon fighting (not super powered at really early levels and weak at later levels.
Well, never mind about the rage interaction. Apparently that doesn’t work.
The Tasha's Favored Foe is concentration, so you a. can't combine it with Hail of Thorns, b. it won't hit harder than Hunter's Mark until 14th level, and even then it's a hard maybe. I also wouldn't call 'not super powered at really early levels and weak at later levels' good scaling.
The next time you hit a creature with a ranged weapon attack before the spell ends, this spell creates a rain of thorns that sprouts from your ranged weapon or ammunition. In addition to the normal effect of the attack, the target of the attack and each creature within 5 feet of it must make a Dexterity saving throw. A creature takes 1d10 piercing damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
At Higher Levels. If you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, the damage increases by 1d10 for each slot level above 1st (to a maximum of 6d10)
Bonus Action Cast Hail of Thorns. Action Attack. Hail of Thorns triggers on a hit as does the new Favored Foe feature. Thus, the dex save is forced and you can mark the creature at the same time. Assuming longbow, dex of 16 and a level 1 spell slot along with a sub level 6 Favored Foe, that's 1d8+3+1d10(half on a successful save)+1d4 damage to the target=15.5 damage on a failed save and 12.75 on a successful save for the main target and 2.75-5.5 to other creatures within 5 ft of it. Depending on the creature and the density, that's a potential for a lot of damage, potentially clearing a lot of smaller enemies while marking the larger enemy (or at least most likely to stick around).
Would this play nice with Cavalier's Unwavering Mark?
Is everyone sure it is a long rest reset for favored foe? What if it was a short rest reset?
The text they are quoting is Long Rest. Short Rest would be an interesting buff if concentration with Ranger spells wasn't what a DM wanted to adjust it with. It definitely sounds like this wasn't the fix that the power gamers were looking for and likely will have some work arounds for it. I'm sure that many power gamers will just ask for the UA version.
It's interesting that this scales similarly to Rage Damage. Rage is a flat 2 until 9, and a flat 3 until 16 when it goes to a flat 4. This goes from an average 2.5 until 6, and an average 3.5 until 14 when it goes to an average 4.5. The number of Rages also scale similarly, going from 2 to 6 though the timing favors the barbarian on that. Would an unlimited number of "Ranger Rages" at 20 be a decent incentive for the 3 campaigns that make it that far?
While the rage damage does scale with number of attacks, the favored foe damage does scale with crits. A barbarian/Ranger would essentially have two different types of rages (and a shifter would have a third) allowing them to choose what gear they wanted to be in. A Champion 3/RangerX could benefit from more crit damage, especially if they could get advantage regularly. There are some interesting things to do with this if you wanted to play with it. Also, this does give a Rogue with a Ranger dip some interesting options.
Is everyone sure it is a long rest reset for favored foe? What if it was a short rest reset?
The text they are quoting is Long Rest. Short Rest would be an interesting buff if concentration with Ranger spells wasn't what a DM wanted to adjust it with. It definitely sounds like this wasn't the fix that the power gamers were looking for and likely will have some work arounds for it. I'm sure that many power gamers will just ask for the UA version.
I am by no means a powergamer and this is not the fix I was hoping for.
That really has nothing to do with power gaming, please don't make the rest of us who aren't satisfied with that version look bad by calling us that.
Are all people that are dissatisfied with Ranger power gamers? No. Are a high number of power gamers dissatisfied with Ranger? Yes. I wasn't saying anything other than Power Gamers will likely just ask for the UA version. I wasn't even saying that all people that ask for the UA version were power gamers. Further, why does acknowledging power gamers have to be an insult to anyone (in that it would "make the rest of us who aren't satisfied with that version look bad...")?
Is everyone sure it is a long rest reset for favored foe? What if it was a short rest reset?
The text they are quoting is Long Rest. Short Rest would be an interesting buff if concentration with Ranger spells wasn't what a DM wanted to adjust it with. It definitely sounds like this wasn't the fix that the power gamers were looking for and likely will have some work arounds for it. I'm sure that many power gamers will just ask for the UA version.
I am by no means a powergamer and this is not the fix I was hoping for.
Right, but you also weren't expecting the UA version to stand were you? I think that power gamers would have been satisfied only with the UA, but hoped for more. I think non power gamers would have been ecstatic with the UA but satisfied with less. The degree less would be dependent on what they thought needed to be fixed. The lack of a compromise on the concentration is what I'm imagining to be the biggest beef non-power gamers will have with this version, or at least have it be stronger and apply to the 1-3 other attacks that various Rangers can get out.
Edit: I can't control how people are going to react to my comments, but I wasn't trying to label anyone as anything explicitly. Power gamers by their nature derive the most satisfaction out of playing with the strongest options. The ones that I've discussed seemed to be at least satisfied with the UA version of the CFVs, though some would have preferred UA Ranger instead. This is all that I was trying to convey by adding power gamers into the mix. I wasn't trying to insult anyone, or trying to insinuate anything by it.
It's interesting that this scales similarly to Rage Damage. Rage is a flat 2 until 9, and a flat 3 until 16 when it goes to a flat 4. This goes from an average 2.5 until 6, and an average 3.5 until 14 when it goes to an average 4.5. The number of Rages also scale similarly, going from 2 to 6 though the timing favors the barbarian on that. Would an unlimited number of "Ranger Rages" at 20 be a decent incentive for the 3 campaigns that make it that far?
While the rage damage does scale with number of attacks, the favored foe damage does scale with crits. A barbarian/Ranger would essentially have two different types of rages (and a shifter would have a third) allowing them to choose what gear they wanted to be in. A Champion 3/RangerX could benefit from more crit damage, especially if they could get advantage regularly. There are some interesting things to do with this if you wanted to play with it. Also, this does give a Rogue with a Ranger dip some interesting options.
The difference is that Barbarians don't have to focus their bonus damage on a single enemy, nor does it prevent them from using another of their features aka spellcasting since a LOT of them are concentration based for Rangers nor can it be interrupted thanks to requirering concentration. Just looking at the numbers it's similar to the Barbarians rage bonus but it comes with too many disadvantages in the bigger picture.
That really has nothing to do with power gaming, please don't make the rest of us who aren't satisfied with that version look bad by calling us that.
Are all people that are dissatisfied with Ranger power gamers? No. Are a high number of power gamers dissatisfied with Ranger? Yes. I wasn't saying anything other than Power Gamers will likely just ask for the UA version. I wasn't even saying that all people that ask for the UA version were power gamers. Further, why does acknowledging power gamers have to be an insult to anyone (in that it would "make the rest of us who aren't satisfied with that version look bad...")?
Because that's the tone of your post. You implied that the people who are unhappy with it are power gamers. Perhaps you should have worded it a bit differently if that wasn't your intention.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I've never encountered a forum where I got this many "talking to a wall" impressions as this one...
It's interesting that this scales similarly to Rage Damage. Rage is a flat 2 until 9, and a flat 3 until 16 when it goes to a flat 4. This goes from an average 2.5 until 6, and an average 3.5 until 14 when it goes to an average 4.5. The number of Rages also scale similarly, going from 2 to 6 though the timing favors the barbarian on that. Would an unlimited number of "Ranger Rages" at 20 be a decent incentive for the 3 campaigns that make it that far?
While the rage damage does scale with number of attacks, the favored foe damage does scale with crits. A barbarian/Ranger would essentially have two different types of rages (and a shifter would have a third) allowing them to choose what gear they wanted to be in. A Champion 3/RangerX could benefit from more crit damage, especially if they could get advantage regularly. There are some interesting things to do with this if you wanted to play with it. Also, this does give a Rogue with a Ranger dip some interesting options.
The difference is that Barbarians don't have to focus their bonus damage on a single enemy, nor does it prevent them from using another of their features aka spellcasting since a LOT of them are concentration based for Rangers nor can it be interrupted thanks to requirering concentration. Just looking at the numbers it's similar to the Barbarians rage bonus but it comes with too many disadvantages in the bigger picture.
I've acknowledged that it wasn't exactly like barbarians and rage. However, seeing that the scaling was similar (and without seeing how this interacts specifically with foe slayer outside of the likely requiring of the mark to apply the foe slayer damage) I was suggesting that a possible buff could be unlimited usage of favored foe at 20 like a barbarian has at 20. People aren't happy and I'm looking for ways that could possibly give it a boost that's similar to the ways that other classes have done. Another was allowing a Ranger to concentrate on Favored Foe and a Ranger spell at the same time. Favored Foe isn't as strong as Hunter's Mark meaning that you could get away with it balance wise, though you would likely have to exclude Hunter's Mark specifically from that added feature.
That really has nothing to do with power gaming, please don't make the rest of us who aren't satisfied with that version look bad by calling us that.
Are all people that are dissatisfied with Ranger power gamers? No. Are a high number of power gamers dissatisfied with Ranger? Yes. I wasn't saying anything other than Power Gamers will likely just ask for the UA version. I wasn't even saying that all people that ask for the UA version were power gamers. Further, why does acknowledging power gamers have to be an insult to anyone (in that it would "make the rest of us who aren't satisfied with that version look bad...")?
Because that's the tone of your post. You implied that the people who are unhappy with it are power gamers. Perhaps you should have worded it a bit differently if that wasn't your intention.
Nothing about the tone of my statement or what I was implying was even close to saying that people who are unhappy are power gamers. Like I said in another post (added by edit) I can't control what people think I am implying or what they are reading into it. That wasn't the intention and I'm not going to say any more about it.
1st-level ranger feature, which replaces the Favored Enemy feature and works with the Foe Slayer feature
When you hit a creature with an attack roll, you can call on your mystical bond with nature to mark the target as your favored enemy for 1 minute or until you lose your concentration (as if you were concentrating on a spell)
The first time on each of your turns that you hit the favored enemy and deal damage to it, including when you mark it, you can increase that damage by 1d4.
You can use this feature to mark a favored enemy a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest.
This feature's extra damage increases when you reach certain levels in this class: to 1d6 at 6th level and to 1d8 at 14th level.
This is definitely an improvement from Favored Enemy, but it doesn't improve rangers a whole ton. I definitely wish that rangers could get hunter's mark for free like the Favored Foe CFV UA. This basically is a worse hunter's mark for free, still with concentration, but it scales slowly to higher damage.
It can work in conjunction with Hunter's Mark, essentially giving you free damage when you don't want to use the spell slots or might need them for other things. If they were going to do it this way, it would have been nice to allow the Ranger to concentrate on a Ranger Spell so that the Ranger could keep Fog Cloud or Ensnaring Strike up while benefiting from Hunter's Mark lite. Having the concentration work with Ranger spells does prevent the Hex/Hunter's Mark combination, which was likely a concern with the UA version.
The damage buffs are set so that many MC builds won't be able to take advantage of them while the number of uses will continue to scale with character level.
For people who find no value in Favored Enemy, this seems like it's a good step up, particularly if DMs allow other Ranger spells to be concentrated while using this.
A) they do not not build features because combining them in MC would break things and B) saying this is a great ability to use over Favored Enemy if your DM completely ignores the fact that it is concentration is the epitome of the flaw with the Ranger, it has a lot of cool abilities IF you just take whats there and ignore or add parts to it. Congratulations!
Is everyone sure it is a long rest reset for favored foe? What if it was a short rest reset?
Who cares if it resets on a short rest, it is still inferior to Hunter's Mark, I agree that making HM concentration less based on Wis was probably too strong, but this is too weak. Just give it to them as free damage each turn, is 1d4 levels 1-5, d6 6-13 and a d8 at 14+ going to break anything?
1st-level ranger feature, which replaces the Favored Enemy feature and works with the Foe Slayer feature
When you hit a creature with an attack roll, you can call on your mystical bond with nature to mark the target as your favored enemy for 1 minute or until you lose your concentration (as if you were concentrating on a spell)
The first time on each of your turns that you hit the favored enemy and deal damage to it, including when you mark it, you can increase that damage by 1d4.
You can use this feature to mark a favored enemy a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest.
This feature's extra damage increases when you reach certain levels in this class: to 1d6 at 6th level and to 1d8 at 14th level.
This is definitely an improvement from Favored Enemy, but it doesn't improve rangers a whole ton. I definitely wish that rangers could get hunter's mark for free like the Favored Foe CFV UA. This basically is a worse hunter's mark for free, still with concentration, but it scales slowly to higher damage.
It can work in conjunction with Hunter's Mark, essentially giving you free damage when you don't want to use the spell slots or might need them for other things. If they were going to do it this way, it would have been nice to allow the Ranger to concentrate on a Ranger Spell so that the Ranger could keep Fog Cloud or Ensnaring Strike up while benefiting from Hunter's Mark lite. Having the concentration work with Ranger spells does prevent the Hex/Hunter's Mark combination, which was likely a concern with the UA version.
The damage buffs are set so that many MC builds won't be able to take advantage of them while the number of uses will continue to scale with character level.
For people who find no value in Favored Enemy, this seems like it's a good step up, particularly if DMs allow other Ranger spells to be concentrated while using this.
A) they do not not build features because combining them in MC would break things and B) saying this is a great ability to use over Favored Enemy if your DM completely ignores the fact that it is concentration is the epitome of the flaw with the Ranger, it has a lot of cool abilities IF you just take whats there and ignore or add parts to it. Congratulations!
If they don't consider MC with features why ever have anything scale off of class levels instead of character level. They do scale cantrips and proficiency regardless of class. Many class specific features only scale according to class level, which isn't necessary unless they are factoring MC into the equation.
With two weapon fighting I'd still rather use Hunter's Mark to be honest. There'd be no real loss of damage for the first round and from the second round on you have up to three chances to trigger Hunter's Mark while with Favoured Foe you can make your BA attack in the first round but only get to trigger the puny 1d4/1d6/1d8 damage once per round regardless of the number of hits.
I've never encountered a forum where I got this many "talking to a wall" impressions as this one...
I posted this but this thread has more traction so I am pasting my thoughts here...
There are dozens of pages and thousands of discussions about the Ranger pros and cons. Pretty much a universal con though is the fact that all of their best spell options are concentration. The class variant features offered a fix for this, but in classic Wizards fashion, took it a bit too far, and made it a bit too powerful. Now thanks to leaks of the book, we pretty much have confirmed that they did replace Favored Enemy with Favored Foe, but we also know that they just made Favored Enemy look like a pretty solid feature, so good job I guess?
Favored foe will let you mark an enemy for 1 minute or until you loose concentration, to deal 1 time per turn a d4 until level 6 when it becomes a d6 and a d8 at 14. Who is going to give up Hunter's Mark for this? I hope the info I saw is wrong and it doesn't require concentration, because if it does - congratulations Wizards, you took the one thing people already universally hate about the Ranger and ADDED to it.
Who else thinks this sounds like a useless option no one will take?
A better option would have been to keep favored enemy as is but let you choose three options each time you got to select it (ultimately letting you have 12/14 of the options) and add...
You can use Hunter’s Mark on a favored Enemy without concentration a number of times up to your wisdom modifier per long rest.
You incentivize actually caring about favored enemy choice, you free up concentration some, but not all of the time, and you give reason to stay in Ranger to unlock more options.
It can work in conjunction with Hunter's Mark, essentially giving you free damage when you don't want to use the spell slots or might need them for other things. If they were going to do it this way, it would have been nice to allow the Ranger to concentrate on a Ranger Spell so that the Ranger could keep Fog Cloud or Ensnaring Strike up while benefiting from Hunter's Mark lite. Having the concentration work with Ranger spells does prevent the Hex/Hunter's Mark combination, which was likely a concern with the UA version.
The damage buffs are set so that many MC builds won't be able to take advantage of them while the number of uses will continue to scale with character level.
For people who find no value in Favored Enemy, this seems like it's a good step up, particularly if DMs allow other Ranger spells to be concentrated while using this.
The beast master, horizon walker, and monster slayer subclasses will make great use of favored foe as they all have abilities that make less use of, or directly compete with, hunter’s mark, unlike the hunter and gloom stalker subclasses with will use it as well as ever. Mathematically the two weapon fighting ranger will make better use of favored foe than hunter’s mark as well. That “mini game” is similar to the warlock with hex dealing “big damage”. The bonus action cost cuts down the damage output when killing enemies with hits.
Is everyone sure it is a long rest reset for favored foe? What if it was a short rest reset?
Hail of Thorns
1st-level conjuration
Casting Time: 1 bonus action
Range: Self
Components: V
Duration: Concentration, up to 1 minute
The next time you hit a creature with a ranged weapon attack before the spell ends, this spell creates a rain of thorns that sprouts from your ranged weapon or ammunition. In addition to the normal effect of the attack, the target of the attack and each creature within 5 feet of it must make a Dexterity saving throw. A creature takes 1d10 piercing damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
At Higher Levels. If you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, the damage increases by 1d10 for each slot level above 1st (to a maximum of 6d10)
Bonus Action Cast Hail of Thorns. Action Attack. Hail of Thorns triggers on a hit as does the new Favored Foe feature. Thus, the dex save is forced and you can mark the creature at the same time. Assuming longbow, dex of 16 and a level 1 spell slot along with a sub level 6 Favored Foe, that's 1d8+3+1d10(half on a successful save)+1d4 damage to the target=15.5 damage on a failed save and 12.75 on a successful save for the main target and 2.75-5.5 to other creatures within 5 ft of it. Depending on the creature and the density, that's a potential for a lot of damage, potentially clearing a lot of smaller enemies while marking the larger enemy (or at least most likely to stick around).
Would this play nice with Cavalier's Unwavering Mark?
The text they are quoting is Long Rest. Short Rest would be an interesting buff if concentration with Ranger spells wasn't what a DM wanted to adjust it with. It definitely sounds like this wasn't the fix that the power gamers were looking for and likely will have some work arounds for it. I'm sure that many power gamers will just ask for the UA version.
That really has nothing to do with power gaming, please don't make the rest of us who aren't satisfied with that version look bad by calling us that.
I've never encountered a forum where I got this many "talking to a wall" impressions as this one...
It's interesting that this scales similarly to Rage Damage. Rage is a flat 2 until 9, and a flat 3 until 16 when it goes to a flat 4. This goes from an average 2.5 until 6, and an average 3.5 until 14 when it goes to an average 4.5. The number of Rages also scale similarly, going from 2 to 6 though the timing favors the barbarian on that. Would an unlimited number of "Ranger Rages" at 20 be a decent incentive for the 3 campaigns that make it that far?
While the rage damage does scale with number of attacks, the favored foe damage does scale with crits. A barbarian/Ranger would essentially have two different types of rages (and a shifter would have a third) allowing them to choose what gear they wanted to be in. A Champion 3/RangerX could benefit from more crit damage, especially if they could get advantage regularly. There are some interesting things to do with this if you wanted to play with it. Also, this does give a Rogue with a Ranger dip some interesting options.
I am by no means a powergamer and this is not the fix I was hoping for.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
Are all people that are dissatisfied with Ranger power gamers? No. Are a high number of power gamers dissatisfied with Ranger? Yes. I wasn't saying anything other than Power Gamers will likely just ask for the UA version. I wasn't even saying that all people that ask for the UA version were power gamers. Further, why does acknowledging power gamers have to be an insult to anyone (in that it would "make the rest of us who aren't satisfied with that version look bad...")?
Right, but you also weren't expecting the UA version to stand were you? I think that power gamers would have been satisfied only with the UA, but hoped for more. I think non power gamers would have been ecstatic with the UA but satisfied with less. The degree less would be dependent on what they thought needed to be fixed. The lack of a compromise on the concentration is what I'm imagining to be the biggest beef non-power gamers will have with this version, or at least have it be stronger and apply to the 1-3 other attacks that various Rangers can get out.
Edit: I can't control how people are going to react to my comments, but I wasn't trying to label anyone as anything explicitly. Power gamers by their nature derive the most satisfaction out of playing with the strongest options. The ones that I've discussed seemed to be at least satisfied with the UA version of the CFVs, though some would have preferred UA Ranger instead. This is all that I was trying to convey by adding power gamers into the mix. I wasn't trying to insult anyone, or trying to insinuate anything by it.
The difference is that Barbarians don't have to focus their bonus damage on a single enemy, nor does it prevent them from using another of their features aka spellcasting since a LOT of them are concentration based for Rangers nor can it be interrupted thanks to requirering concentration. Just looking at the numbers it's similar to the Barbarians rage bonus but it comes with too many disadvantages in the bigger picture.
I've never encountered a forum where I got this many "talking to a wall" impressions as this one...
Because that's the tone of your post. You implied that the people who are unhappy with it are power gamers. Perhaps you should have worded it a bit differently if that wasn't your intention.
I've never encountered a forum where I got this many "talking to a wall" impressions as this one...
I've acknowledged that it wasn't exactly like barbarians and rage. However, seeing that the scaling was similar (and without seeing how this interacts specifically with foe slayer outside of the likely requiring of the mark to apply the foe slayer damage) I was suggesting that a possible buff could be unlimited usage of favored foe at 20 like a barbarian has at 20. People aren't happy and I'm looking for ways that could possibly give it a boost that's similar to the ways that other classes have done. Another was allowing a Ranger to concentrate on Favored Foe and a Ranger spell at the same time. Favored Foe isn't as strong as Hunter's Mark meaning that you could get away with it balance wise, though you would likely have to exclude Hunter's Mark specifically from that added feature.
Nothing about the tone of my statement or what I was implying was even close to saying that people who are unhappy are power gamers. Like I said in another post (added by edit) I can't control what people think I am implying or what they are reading into it. That wasn't the intention and I'm not going to say any more about it.
A) they do not not build features because combining them in MC would break things and B) saying this is a great ability to use over Favored Enemy if your DM completely ignores the fact that it is concentration is the epitome of the flaw with the Ranger, it has a lot of cool abilities IF you just take whats there and ignore or add parts to it. Congratulations!
Who cares if it resets on a short rest, it is still inferior to Hunter's Mark, I agree that making HM concentration less based on Wis was probably too strong, but this is too weak. Just give it to them as free damage each turn, is 1d4 levels 1-5, d6 6-13 and a d8 at 14+ going to break anything?
If they don't consider MC with features why ever have anything scale off of class levels instead of character level. They do scale cantrips and proficiency regardless of class. Many class specific features only scale according to class level, which isn't necessary unless they are factoring MC into the equation.
It is free damage. Wait. Do you mean trigger on each hit?