That wasn't a dig at you, sfPanzer. I don't disagree with you. If lighting arrow or hail of thorns just triggered on a hit, it would be a game changer for the ranger. Fun fact! In the last D&D NEXT playtest packet (I found online) the spell hail of thorns was an instantaneous duration spell. You just cast it when you make an attack.
Plenty of spellcasting classes have access to loads of concentration options; you can't use them all at once. It's a very basic spellcasting mechanic, and it's not unique to Rangers or Ranger spells; and as I've pointed out multiple times now they have spells that don't require concentration.
Does it require a little bit of thought before you can get the most out of it? Absolutely. But it's only a problem if you go out of your way to make it a problem for yourself.
Lmao okay continue arguing with yourself then.
And you can feel free to stop posting if you've nothing more to say; you shouldn't complain about a "problem" if you're not prepared to have people disagree with you, and can't actually justify why it's not your own fault. Juggling concentration is a basic element to spell-casting; if you can't handle it, don't take so many concentration spells, it's hardly rocket science.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
While it's true that in the first round, FF is way ahead (33.5 vs 25), revisit that same fight on the next round and now it's pretty much a wash (67 vs 65.5). Every round AFTER that FF is getting dumpstered (33.5 vs 40.5). That's basically a whole other attack worth of damage stacked on there.
Constantly changing targets to force Hunter's Mark to spend bonus actions doesn't really do FF much of a favor either. You're going to run out of Favored Foe LONG before Hunter's Mark has run it's course.
While it's true that in the first round, FF is way ahead (33.5 vs 25), revisit that same fight on the next round and now it's pretty much a wash (67 vs 65.5). Every round AFTER that FF is getting dumpstered (33.5 vs 40.5). That's basically a whole other attack worth of damage stacked on there.
Constantly changing targets to force Hunter's Mark to spend bonus actions doesn't really do FF much of a favor either. You're going to run out of Favored Foe LONG before Hunter's Mark has run it's course.
Oh yes. It’s fiddly, at best.
Its almost like WotC think that rangers are...too powerful...already.
Or you can just accept that people can have different opinions about things. Just because I don't care to argue with you it doesn't mean you are automatically right.
If your "opinion" is that Rangers are uniquely bad because they have the same concentration mechanic and limitations as any other spell-caster, then your opinion is objectively wrong. If your "opinion" is that the leaked Tasha's Cauldron feature doesn't help with juggling concentration, then again, you're objectively wrong, as it not only does, but you don't need to juggle concentration spells if you don't want to.
It's not an issue of my disagreeing with you from different viewpoints, it's that your statements are simply, provably false, and your refusing to defend them only makes it seem like you're well aware of this.
The main "problem" with the Ranger is that it's not a simple class to get the most out of; you can't just slap in the recommended ability scores, add a battleaxe and you're done. While someone might argue that it could be streamlined obvious counterpoint to that is – what are you willing to use? I love the complexity and strategy of the Ranger when you really dive into it, but it won't be for everyone, but then there are also simpler builds for it that work just fine as well (i.e- you can actually streamline it yourself). And with a supportive DM none of it should matter anyway.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Or you can just accept that people can have different opinions about things. Just because I don't care to argue with you it doesn't mean you are automatically right.
If your "opinion" is that Rangers are uniquely bad because they have the same concentration mechanic and limitations as any other spell-caster, then your opinion is objectively wrong. If your "opinion" is that the leaked Tasha's Cauldron feature doesn't help with juggling concentration, then again, you're objectively wrong, as it not only does, but you don't need to juggle concentration spells if you don't want to.
It's not an issue of my disagreeing with you from different viewpoints, it's that your statements are simply, provably false, and your refusing to defend them only makes it seem like you're well aware of this.
The main "problem" with the Ranger is that it's not a simple class to get the most out of; you can't just slap in the recommended ability scores, add a battleaxe and you're done. While someone might argue that it could be streamlined obvious counterpoint to that is – what are you willing to use? I love the complexity and strategy of the Ranger when you really dive into it, but it won't be for everyone, but then there are also simpler builds for it that work just fine as well (i.e- you can actually streamline it yourself). And with a supportive DM none of it should matter anyway.
How does one juggle concentration spells? The second you use one, it disrupts the other - it isn't temporarily suspended to come back after the other, its gone, that isn't juggling. Also I am unclear if you are suggesting that FF doesn't affect concentration, which it kinda sounds like you are in which case you'd be wrong.
Weird, I could of sworn I posted this but I guess I must of never hit post. Let's see how much of this post I can remember... probably going to butcher it but worth a shot.
Developer intentions for ranger are likely a class that tactically plans the best spells to empower their attacks. Assuming this is the intent, it fits perfectly, the concentration boosts the idea of hand-selecting the best spell for the encounter, then switching it if needed (most of the concentration spells are a bonus action, not a action, so your aren't even wasting attacks unless your dual-wielding). The Paladin comparison is actually decent, as both are designed like this with differences to impose certain playstyles.
Paladins, also have mostly concentration spells which conflict with each other. Just, nobody cares about half of them. They even have their own Hunter's mark nobody uses. However, Paladin's are motivated towards damage-dealing spells to maximize Divine Smite nukes, which is represented in most their concentration spells being either damage with a bonus effect to damage easier or healing.
Rangers however have more tactical spells with more diverse options to support a more versatile move-set. Let's pick a handful,
Ensnaring Strike to stun and lock a single target in place, Lightning Arrow for massive AOE damage against weak hordes, Zephyr Strike for quickly leaving a bad situation (dash + disengage + Extra attack all in one action), Hunter’s Mark for focus firing, Spike Growth to stop people from following you (also if you a grappling buddy, I don't even need to explain how useful that spell can be).
So the intent is right on point, but is it balanced? Well, due to the nature of D&D, "damage with a bonus effect to damage easier" (from above) is generally more valuable than having a versatile set of spells. Most classes ignore exploration for gaining flashy combat-related features, so Rangers naturally look underpowered in comparison. Also Rangers, for whatever reason, get all their combat abilities from subclasses & spells, which is a weird choice and a cursory look over the base Ranger would dumbfound most people who don't know better.
Terms of number crunching they preform average damage, which disappointing compared to the amount of effort it takes to go though all those spells.
Or you can just accept that people can have different opinions about things. Just because I don't care to argue with you it doesn't mean you are automatically right.
If your "opinion" is that Rangers are uniquely bad because they have the same concentration mechanic and limitations as any other spell-caster, then your opinion is objectively wrong. If your "opinion" is that the leaked Tasha's Cauldron feature doesn't help with juggling concentration, then again, you're objectively wrong, as it not only does, but you don't need to juggle concentration spells if you don't want to.
It's not an issue of my disagreeing with you from different viewpoints, it's that your statements are simply, provably false, and your refusing to defend them only makes it seem like you're well aware of this.
The main "problem" with the Ranger is that it's not a simple class to get the most out of; you can't just slap in the recommended ability scores, add a battleaxe and you're done. While someone might argue that it could be streamlined obvious counterpoint to that is – what are you willing to use? I love the complexity and strategy of the Ranger when you really dive into it, but it won't be for everyone, but then there are also simpler builds for it that work just fine as well (i.e- you can actually streamline it yourself). And with a supportive DM none of it should matter anyway.
How does one juggle concentration spells? The second you use one, it disrupts the other - it isn't temporarily suspended to come back after the other, its gone, that isn't juggling. Also I am unclear if you are suggesting that FF doesn't affect concentration, which it kinda sounds like you are in which case you'd be wrong.
Juggling concentration is managing your concentration spells; when one goes up, another goes down, please don't be purposefully obtuse.
And Favoured Foe does help; the "problem" with concentration juggling with Hunter's Mark specifically is if you bring up Hunter's Mark to boost your damage, then later get a chance to make use of Lightning Arrow or whatever, then using the latter wastes the spell slot you spent on Hunter's Mark. This also means that if you then want to bring your damage bonus back up, you've got to cast Hunter's Mark again. With Favoured Foe you have an additional resource you can spend to give yourself a damage bonus instead, so if you're in a situation where you're not sure if Hunter's Mark will be the best use of a slot, then you can use Favoured Foe instead so it's less of a loss, or if you do interrupt Hunter's Mark you can use Favoured Foe afterwards instead rather than doubling down on spell slots used. Favoured Foe also doesn't seem to require a bonus action, so it's actually easier to bring up, potentially within the same turn.
Lastly, for what now feels like the millionth time, interrupting concentration is the player's choice; if you don't like doing it, don't pick lots of concentration spells, this is the exact same situation for any caster. Rangers have alternatives to many of concentration spells that are just as useful and don't interrupt concentration.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Or you can just accept that people can have different opinions about things. Just because I don't care to argue with you it doesn't mean you are automatically right.
If your "opinion" is that Rangers are uniquely bad because they have the same concentration mechanic and limitations as any other spell-caster, then your opinion is objectively wrong. If your "opinion" is that the leaked Tasha's Cauldron feature doesn't help with juggling concentration, then again, you're objectively wrong, as it not only does, but you don't need to juggle concentration spells if you don't want to.
It's not an issue of my disagreeing with you from different viewpoints, it's that your statements are simply, provably false, and your refusing to defend them only makes it seem like you're well aware of this.
The main "problem" with the Ranger is that it's not a simple class to get the most out of; you can't just slap in the recommended ability scores, add a battleaxe and you're done. While someone might argue that it could be streamlined obvious counterpoint to that is – what are you willing to use? I love the complexity and strategy of the Ranger when you really dive into it, but it won't be for everyone, but then there are also simpler builds for it that work just fine as well (i.e- you can actually streamline it yourself). And with a supportive DM none of it should matter anyway.
How does one juggle concentration spells? The second you use one, it disrupts the other - it isn't temporarily suspended to come back after the other, its gone, that isn't juggling. Also I am unclear if you are suggesting that FF doesn't affect concentration, which it kinda sounds like you are in which case you'd be wrong.
Juggling concentration is managing your concentration spells; when one goes up, another goes down, please don't purposefully obtuse.
And Favoured Foe does help; the "problem" with concentration juggling with Hunter's Mark specifically is if you bring up Hunter's Mark to boost your damage, then later get a chance to make use of Lightning Arrow or whatever, then using the latter wastes the spell slot you spent on Hunter's Mark. This also means that if you then want to bring your damage bonus back up, you've got to cast Hunter's Mark again. With Favoured Foe you have an additional resource you can spend to give yourself a damage bonus instead, so if you're in a situation where you're not sure if Hunter's Mark will be the best use of a slot, then you can use Favoured Foe instead so it's less of a loss, or if you do interrupt Hunter's Mark you can use Favoured Foe afterwards instead rather than doubling down on spell slots used. Favoured Foe also doesn't seem to require a bonus action, so it's actually easier to bring up, potentially within the same turn.
Lastly, for what now feels like the millionth time, interrupting concentration is the player's choice; if you don't like doing it, don't pick lots of concentration spells, this is the exact same situation for any caster. Rangers have alternatives to many of concentration spells that are just as useful and don't interrupt concentration.
You really want to look at this list with 22 concentration spells and 9 non and claim that you have many alternatives just as useful? (copy/paste from Beyond isn't super clean)
I hate to pick at old wounds, but does anyone else think this just adds more "fiddley bits" to a class that already has a lot of "fiddley bits" to begin with? Favored foe is hardly user friendly. I wonder why WotC just didn't add something to the existing favored enemy like "In addition, once on each of your turns, you can add your PB to the damage roll of an attack you make against one of your favored enemies."
The reason they didn't do that is because one of the main complaints people bring up with Rangers is that their features are too situational. Adding bonus damage to Favoured Enemy would change nothing about it being too dependant on what the DM throws at the party.
That being said, I think they could have easily solved that issue by letting the Ranger pick more from the Favoured Enemy list so it's more likely to encounter one of them.
That is a lot of the problem, but I think it goes a bit further that in not wanting the ranger to completely trivialize anything involving said situational feature when they happen they are nearly meaningless in design weigh (or they are ribbons in current terminology). I think that the numerous attempt by WotC to revise that class show how underdeveloped and that it was only included in that state it is, was to avoid that issues not including class would have had on the fan base. Ranger is such an iconic class/archetype that players want it to work and having to use the optional multiclass rule would have left a bad taste with players if they had waited to develop it to the same place many of the other classes are.
You really want to look at this list with 22 concentration spells and 9 non and claim that you have many alternatives just as useful? (copy/paste from Beyond isn't super clean)
I'm not really sure how you're compiling your list, the number of spells available to Rangers that require concentration and don't require concentration are nearly equal (29 vs 27 respectively); a fully levelled Ranger knows 11 spells, so you can hardly argue that there isn't enough choice to avoid concentration issues, especially when you can still take a small number of concentration spells depending upon what you need them for, e.g- Hunter's Mark for during combat, some others for non-combat/setup/ambushes etc. where switching isn't a problem.
Most casters are perfectly happy even with two or three in-combat concentration spells, and accept that they must pick between them; I'm not sure why people playing Rangers (hypothetically in some cases I suspect) are facing any unique hardship here?
And none of this changes the fact that the leaked Tasha's update does help with concentration juggling, as it lets you avoid wasting a spell slot by ending something early; the most common case will be ending Hunter's Mark early to cast a one-off concentration spell, but you can either use Favoured Foe instead in the first place, or use it to replace Hunter's Mark after interrupting it, either way losing one fewer spell slot (or two if you use it to do both). The key issue is what you're interrupting for, and whether you actually need to do that; if you do then interrupting is a perfectly acceptable cost, otherwise you should reconsider your choice of spells.
On that point, the bigger issue with Rangers is that you can only swap one spell per level, so if you screw up your spell choices early on it's a pain to fix them, but I doubt many DMs would stick to that rule if taking too many concentration spells is hurting your gameplay; I'm still hopeful that the UA changes to swapping spells (and cantrips) will be in Tasha's Cauldron, as that let you swap one spell (or cantrip) per long rest, so it's easier to fix issues, and you can swap ambush spells in and out depending whether you think you'll need them (they're some of my favourite spells for a Ranger, but they're super situational, better when you can scout).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Does anyone want to talk about the (leaked) major (optional) power boost for melee ranger builds with the new fighting style and fog cloud spell? That’s a concentration spell.
Does anyone want to talk about the (leaked) major (optional) power boost for melee ranger builds with the new fighting style and fog cloud spell? That’s a concentration spell.
Do you mean Blind Fighting (was also in UA)? This could be a fun way to play, though I'd say it's not unique to the Ranger; they might be able to create the fog themselves, but in general having another caster do it will be better, in which case anyone with Blind Fighting will benefit (and you can then still concentrate on something else to become a full-blown fog monster). Eldritch Knights can also take Fog Cloud I think, and they'll be even more terrifying with Blind Fighting once they surpass the Ranger in raw attacks.
Though in terms of character build a Ranger definitely fits more easily into the theme of fighting in fog; I'd expect a DM to ask other characters to justify why they have the fighting style, especially if can't cast fog cloud or similar themselves.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
That wasn't a dig at you, sfPanzer. I don't disagree with you. If lighting arrow or hail of thorns just triggered on a hit, it would be a game changer for the ranger. Fun fact! In the last D&D NEXT playtest packet (I found online) the spell hail of thorns was an instantaneous duration spell. You just cast it when you make an attack.
And you can feel free to stop posting if you've nothing more to say; you shouldn't complain about a "problem" if you're not prepared to have people disagree with you, and can't actually justify why it's not your own fault. Juggling concentration is a basic element to spell-casting; if you can't handle it, don't take so many concentration spells, it's hardly rocket science.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
While it's true that in the first round, FF is way ahead (33.5 vs 25), revisit that same fight on the next round and now it's pretty much a wash (67 vs 65.5). Every round AFTER that FF is getting dumpstered (33.5 vs 40.5). That's basically a whole other attack worth of damage stacked on there.
Constantly changing targets to force Hunter's Mark to spend bonus actions doesn't really do FF much of a favor either. You're going to run out of Favored Foe LONG before Hunter's Mark has run it's course.
Oh yes. It’s fiddly, at best.
Its almost like WotC think that rangers are...too powerful...already.
If your "opinion" is that Rangers are uniquely bad because they have the same concentration mechanic and limitations as any other spell-caster, then your opinion is objectively wrong. If your "opinion" is that the leaked Tasha's Cauldron feature doesn't help with juggling concentration, then again, you're objectively wrong, as it not only does, but you don't need to juggle concentration spells if you don't want to.
It's not an issue of my disagreeing with you from different viewpoints, it's that your statements are simply, provably false, and your refusing to defend them only makes it seem like you're well aware of this.
The main "problem" with the Ranger is that it's not a simple class to get the most out of; you can't just slap in the recommended ability scores, add a battleaxe and you're done. While someone might argue that it could be streamlined obvious counterpoint to that is – what are you willing to use? I love the complexity and strategy of the Ranger when you really dive into it, but it won't be for everyone, but then there are also simpler builds for it that work just fine as well (i.e- you can actually streamline it yourself). And with a supportive DM none of it should matter anyway.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
How does one juggle concentration spells? The second you use one, it disrupts the other - it isn't temporarily suspended to come back after the other, its gone, that isn't juggling. Also I am unclear if you are suggesting that FF doesn't affect concentration, which it kinda sounds like you are in which case you'd be wrong.
Weird, I could of sworn I posted this but I guess I must of never hit post. Let's see how much of this post I can remember... probably going to butcher it but worth a shot.
Developer intentions for ranger are likely a class that tactically plans the best spells to empower their attacks. Assuming this is the intent, it fits perfectly, the concentration boosts the idea of hand-selecting the best spell for the encounter, then switching it if needed (most of the concentration spells are a bonus action, not a action, so your aren't even wasting attacks unless your dual-wielding). The Paladin comparison is actually decent, as both are designed like this with differences to impose certain playstyles.
Paladins, also have mostly concentration spells which conflict with each other. Just, nobody cares about half of them. They even have their own Hunter's mark nobody uses. However, Paladin's are motivated towards damage-dealing spells to maximize Divine Smite nukes, which is represented in most their concentration spells being either damage with a bonus effect to damage easier or healing.
Rangers however have more tactical spells with more diverse options to support a more versatile move-set. Let's pick a handful,
Ensnaring Strike to stun and lock a single target in place, Lightning Arrow for massive AOE damage against weak hordes, Zephyr Strike for quickly leaving a bad situation (dash + disengage + Extra attack all in one action), Hunter’s Mark for focus firing, Spike Growth to stop people from following you (also if you a grappling buddy, I don't even need to explain how useful that spell can be).
So the intent is right on point, but is it balanced? Well, due to the nature of D&D, "damage with a bonus effect to damage easier" (from above) is generally more valuable than having a versatile set of spells. Most classes ignore exploration for gaining flashy combat-related features, so Rangers naturally look underpowered in comparison. Also Rangers, for whatever reason, get all their combat abilities from subclasses & spells, which is a weird choice and a cursory look over the base Ranger would dumbfound most people who don't know better.
Terms of number crunching they preform average damage, which disappointing compared to the amount of effort it takes to go though all those spells.
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.
Juggling concentration is managing your concentration spells; when one goes up, another goes down, please don't be purposefully obtuse.
And Favoured Foe does help; the "problem" with concentration juggling with Hunter's Mark specifically is if you bring up Hunter's Mark to boost your damage, then later get a chance to make use of Lightning Arrow or whatever, then using the latter wastes the spell slot you spent on Hunter's Mark. This also means that if you then want to bring your damage bonus back up, you've got to cast Hunter's Mark again. With Favoured Foe you have an additional resource you can spend to give yourself a damage bonus instead, so if you're in a situation where you're not sure if Hunter's Mark will be the best use of a slot, then you can use Favoured Foe instead so it's less of a loss, or if you do interrupt Hunter's Mark you can use Favoured Foe afterwards instead rather than doubling down on spell slots used. Favoured Foe also doesn't seem to require a bonus action, so it's actually easier to bring up, potentially within the same turn.
Lastly, for what now feels like the millionth time, interrupting concentration is the player's choice; if you don't like doing it, don't pick lots of concentration spells, this is the exact same situation for any caster. Rangers have alternatives to many of concentration spells that are just as useful and don't interrupt concentration.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
You really want to look at this list with 22 concentration spells and 9 non and claim that you have many alternatives just as useful? (copy/paste from Beyond isn't super clean)
FF should have just added to FE, not have been a choice
I hate to pick at old wounds, but does anyone else think this just adds more "fiddley bits" to a class that already has a lot of "fiddley bits" to begin with? Favored foe is hardly user friendly. I wonder why WotC just didn't add something to the existing favored enemy like "In addition, once on each of your turns, you can add your PB to the damage roll of an attack you make against one of your favored enemies."
That is a lot of the problem, but I think it goes a bit further that in not wanting the ranger to completely trivialize anything involving said situational feature when they happen they are nearly meaningless in design weigh (or they are ribbons in current terminology). I think that the numerous attempt by WotC to revise that class show how underdeveloped and that it was only included in that state it is, was to avoid that issues not including class would have had on the fan base. Ranger is such an iconic class/archetype that players want it to work and having to use the optional multiclass rule would have left a bad taste with players if they had waited to develop it to the same place many of the other classes are.
I'm not really sure how you're compiling your list, the number of spells available to Rangers that require concentration and don't require concentration are nearly equal (29 vs 27 respectively); a fully levelled Ranger knows 11 spells, so you can hardly argue that there isn't enough choice to avoid concentration issues, especially when you can still take a small number of concentration spells depending upon what you need them for, e.g- Hunter's Mark for during combat, some others for non-combat/setup/ambushes etc. where switching isn't a problem.
Most casters are perfectly happy even with two or three in-combat concentration spells, and accept that they must pick between them; I'm not sure why people playing Rangers (hypothetically in some cases I suspect) are facing any unique hardship here?
And none of this changes the fact that the leaked Tasha's update does help with concentration juggling, as it lets you avoid wasting a spell slot by ending something early; the most common case will be ending Hunter's Mark early to cast a one-off concentration spell, but you can either use Favoured Foe instead in the first place, or use it to replace Hunter's Mark after interrupting it, either way losing one fewer spell slot (or two if you use it to do both). The key issue is what you're interrupting for, and whether you actually need to do that; if you do then interrupting is a perfectly acceptable cost, otherwise you should reconsider your choice of spells.
On that point, the bigger issue with Rangers is that you can only swap one spell per level, so if you screw up your spell choices early on it's a pain to fix them, but I doubt many DMs would stick to that rule if taking too many concentration spells is hurting your gameplay; I'm still hopeful that the UA changes to swapping spells (and cantrips) will be in Tasha's Cauldron, as that let you swap one spell (or cantrip) per long rest, so it's easier to fix issues, and you can swap ambush spells in and out depending whether you think you'll need them (they're some of my favourite spells for a Ranger, but they're super situational, better when you can scout).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Does anyone want to talk about the (leaked) major (optional) power boost for melee ranger builds with the new fighting style and fog cloud spell? That’s a concentration spell.
Do you mean Blind Fighting (was also in UA)? This could be a fun way to play, though I'd say it's not unique to the Ranger; they might be able to create the fog themselves, but in general having another caster do it will be better, in which case anyone with Blind Fighting will benefit (and you can then still concentrate on something else to become a full-blown fog monster). Eldritch Knights can also take Fog Cloud I think, and they'll be even more terrifying with Blind Fighting once they surpass the Ranger in raw attacks.
Though in terms of character build a Ranger definitely fits more easily into the theme of fighting in fog; I'd expect a DM to ask other characters to justify why they have the fighting style, especially if can't cast fog cloud or similar themselves.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.