Again, your idea of the "community" can go stuff itself.
It's not a thing you can hold up as an exemplar for anything. Yes, there have been a few UA attempts and a metric ton of fan works. There are also more fan-made classes, subclasses, and races than you can shake a quarterstaff at. Nine Hells, there are multiple takes on the same darn thing. Lord knows how many. Even if the "community" could agree that a niche is wanted or needed to be filled, it can't agree on how.
Nothing has been "fixed". It's all homebrew. And most of it is hogwash.
The fact WotC has done two full rewrites of the class with special focus on the trash fires that are these two abilities is more than enough evidence that either: they dislike the class, the community dislikes the class, or most likely BOTH dislike the class and have wanted to fix it for some time.
Again, your idea of the "community" can go stuff itself.
It's not a thing you can hold up as an exemplar for anything. Yes, there have been a few UA attempts and a metric ton of fan works. There are also more fan-made classes, subclasses, and races than you can shake a quarterstaff at. Nine Hells, there are multiple takes on the same darn thing. Lord knows how many. Even if the "community" could agree that a niche is wanted or needed to be filled, it can't agree on how.
Nothing has been "fixed". It's all homebrew. And most of it is hogwash.
The fact WotC has done two full rewrites of the class with special focus on the trash fires that are these two abilities is more than enough evidence that either: they dislike the class, the community dislikes the class, or most likely BOTH dislike the class and have wanted to fix it for some time.
Two full rewrites? Now you're just making stuff up. Mearls dabbled here and there with his Happy Fun Hour, but he messed with everything. There have been two UAs; the first of which only took them up through 5th-level. The Ranger, Revised is the more famous of the two, and goes all the way to 20, but WotC also knew it would never see publication.
Makes it really hard to take you seriously when you lie like that.
Again, your idea of the "community" can go stuff itself.
It's not a thing you can hold up as an exemplar for anything. Yes, there have been a few UA attempts and a metric ton of fan works. There are also more fan-made classes, subclasses, and races than you can shake a quarterstaff at. Nine Hells, there are multiple takes on the same darn thing. Lord knows how many. Even if the "community" could agree that a niche is wanted or needed to be filled, it can't agree on how.
Nothing has been "fixed". It's all homebrew. And most of it is hogwash.
The fact WotC has done two full rewrites of the class with special focus on the trash fires that are these two abilities is more than enough evidence that either: they dislike the class, the community dislikes the class, or most likely BOTH dislike the class and have wanted to fix it for some time.
Two full rewrites? Now you're just making stuff up. Mearls dabbled here and there with his Happy Fun Hour, but he messed with everything. There have been two UAs; the first of which only took them up through 5th-level. The Ranger, Revised is the more famous of the two, and goes all the way to 20, but WotC also knew it would never see publication.
Makes it really hard to take you seriously when you lie like that.
Again, your idea of the "community" can go stuff itself.
It's not a thing you can hold up as an exemplar for anything. Yes, there have been a few UA attempts and a metric ton of fan works. There are also more fan-made classes, subclasses, and races than you can shake a quarterstaff at. Nine Hells, there are multiple takes on the same darn thing. Lord knows how many. Even if the "community" could agree that a niche is wanted or needed to be filled, it can't agree on how.
Nothing has been "fixed". It's all homebrew. And most of it is hogwash.
The fact WotC has done two full rewrites of the class with special focus on the trash fires that are these two abilities is more than enough evidence that either: they dislike the class, the community dislikes the class, or most likely BOTH dislike the class and have wanted to fix it for some time.
Two full rewrites? Now you're just making stuff up. Mearls dabbled here and there with his Happy Fun Hour, but he messed with everything. There have been two UAs; the first of which only took them up through 5th-level. The Ranger, Revised is the more famous of the two, and goes all the way to 20, but WotC also knew it would never see publication.
Makes it really hard to take you seriously when you lie like that.
Dude....they rewrote all the features 10th level and below......I am not sue how this is not a rewrite.
You honestly have a huge sense of denial about this and it shows.
I would like to quote the revised ranger UA:
"The planning phase goes back to our review of playtest feedback. We review data and read anecdotes on Reddit, forums, and social media. We try to decide if addressing the issue is worth the potential disruption to the game. In this case, we felt that a few factors combined to push for a change. Many players want to play rangers, but few were happy with the class, which held its place at the bottom of class power rankings by a significant margin. The class’s individual features also filled the top-ten list of lowest-rated individual character features."
The community voted on these features...they found them to be lacking. There is no discussion here. WotC admitted it in the UA that people disliked the features. Its very very very clear.
I am not sure how you can look at this and say "Nah the majority of people like this..."
They ended up rewriting the core abilities for the class up to 10th level. They did this for no other class.
Words have meanings, and you're not using them correctly. What we have in Tasha's are optional features designed around a different design of the class. They are not mandatory. They do not have to be allowed. It isn't errata. Heck, the names aren't even the same.
They. Did. Not. Rewrite. Anything.
And with that, I'm done with you. Continue wallowing in your own ignorance.
The obtuse nature by which you want to cling to the idea that these optional features are also not a rewrite is crazy to me....
They literally took the feature and wrote it again so as to alter or improve it. If you pick it it replaces the old feature....they did this for 1 class and 1 class only.
To pretend it is not in any way related to the concerns for the class in the past is straight denial.....
Dude....they rewrote all the features 10th level and below......I am not sue how this is not a rewrite.
You honestly have a huge sense of denial about this and it shows.
I would like to quote the revised ranger UA:
"The planning phase goes back to our review of playtest feedback. We review data and read anecdotes on Reddit, forums, and social media. We try to decide if addressing the issue is worth the potential disruption to the game. In this case, we felt that a few factors combined to push for a change. Many players want to play rangers, but few were happy with the class, which held its place at the bottom of class power rankings by a significant margin. The class’s individual features also filled the top-ten list of lowest-rated individual character features."
The community voted on these features...they found them to be lacking. There is no discussion here. WotC admitted it in the UA that people disliked the features. Its very very very clear.
I am not sure how you can look at this and say "Nah the majority of people like this..."
They ended up rewriting the core abilities for the class up to 10th level. They did this for no other class.
First of all they did not rewrite the first 10 levels of it. Otherwise there would not be an issue over how the level 7 works and how much of it does or doesn't become redundant because of the new optional beast templates that are now available.
They have literally only done minor tweaks. If they had done rewriteups for these things we wouldn't have a mixed issue over the level 7 power and they likely would have looked at the level 11 power to make sure that it falls in line more clearly and easily since it's so close to 10 and a major point where a lot of classes get things of this kind of nature so would have been a stopping point to look at closely anyway. Where as 10 is just an arbitrary middle number that has no more meaning than being half of 20 and almost none of the class structures are actually built around that being in any way significant. Which they would know when looking at things.
All they primarily tried to work on and rewrite is the issue of the beast itself and how it interacted with the players actions. That's all they've ever done. Even in the UA. Even the General Class Option Changes that they released in Tasha's are not actually everything up to level 10. They are just the two sets of class options that People complain about the most out of the entire set that are offered and are still in ranges that see general play. There was no entire rewrite and rebalance of the class up to that number. They never even state as much. They just say they listened to various places and made some response changes to Lessen Complaints about the class in general and one sticking point about the BM in particular.
Dude....they rewrote all the features 10th level and below......I am not sue how this is not a rewrite.
You honestly have a huge sense of denial about this and it shows.
I would like to quote the revised ranger UA:
"The planning phase goes back to our review of playtest feedback. We review data and read anecdotes on Reddit, forums, and social media. We try to decide if addressing the issue is worth the potential disruption to the game. In this case, we felt that a few factors combined to push for a change. Many players want to play rangers, but few were happy with the class, which held its place at the bottom of class power rankings by a significant margin. The class’s individual features also filled the top-ten list of lowest-rated individual character features."
The community voted on these features...they found them to be lacking. There is no discussion here. WotC admitted it in the UA that people disliked the features. Its very very very clear.
I am not sure how you can look at this and say "Nah the majority of people like this..."
They ended up rewriting the core abilities for the class up to 10th level. They did this for no other class.
First of all they did not rewrite the first 10 levels of it. Otherwise there would not be an issue over how the level 7 works and how much of it does or doesn't become redundant because of the new optional beast templates that are now available.
They have literally only done minor tweaks. If they had done rewriteups for these things we wouldn't have a mixed issue over the level 7 power and they likely would have looked at the level 11 power to make sure that it falls in line more clearly and easily since it's so close to 10 and a major point where a lot of classes get things of this kind of nature so would have been a stopping point to look at closely anyway. Where as 10 is just an arbitrary middle number that has no more meaning than being half of 20 and almost none of the class structures are actually built around that being in any way significant. Which they would know when looking at things.
All they primarily tried to work on and rewrite is the issue of the beast itself and how it interacted with the players actions. That's all they've ever done. Even in the UA. Even the General Class Option Changes that they released in Tasha's are not actually everything up to level 10. They are just the two sets of class options that People complain about the most out of the entire set that are offered and are still in ranges that see general play. There was no entire rewrite and rebalance of the class up to that number. They never even state as much. They just say they listened to various places and made some response changes to Lessen Complaints about the class in general and one sticking point about the BM in particular.
No way...they make each and every feature completely different up to 10th level.
I mean yeah...this is ultimately what they came up with.
My point being is that SEVERAL times throughout the life span of this system has tried to fix the issues with ranger. They all failed because they ultimately did not address the issues with ranger in a way that people felt good about them.
Tasha's met with great success in UA form and they moved forward with them.
But my point still stands....the community wanted something different and ultimately got it.
I mean yeah...this is ultimately what they came up with.
My point being is that SEVERAL times throughout the life span of this system has tried to fix the issues with ranger. They all failed because they ultimately did not address the issues with ranger in a way that people felt good about them.
Tasha's met with great success in UA form and they moved forward with them.
But my point still stands....the community wanted something different and ultimately got it.
I think a large portion of the community wanted something different out of the ranger because of the way they play the game. Still do. Always will. But I know a portion of the community (I would argue large portion, but I'm biased in that direction) like the ranger the way it is because of the way they play the game. Still do. Always will. I think a big book of class options, official options, was an elegant compromise on WotC's part, taking the heat off them for making either wrong/bad decision and letting those who like whatever do whatever, officially.
Dude....they rewrote all the features 10th level and below......I am not sue how this is not a rewrite.
You honestly have a huge sense of denial about this and it shows.
I would like to quote the revised ranger UA:
"The planning phase goes back to our review of playtest feedback. We review data and read anecdotes on Reddit, forums, and social media. We try to decide if addressing the issue is worth the potential disruption to the game. In this case, we felt that a few factors combined to push for a change. Many players want to play rangers, but few were happy with the class, which held its place at the bottom of class power rankings by a significant margin. The class’s individual features also filled the top-ten list of lowest-rated individual character features."
The community voted on these features...they found them to be lacking. There is no discussion here. WotC admitted it in the UA that people disliked the features. Its very very very clear.
I am not sure how you can look at this and say "Nah the majority of people like this..."
They ended up rewriting the core abilities for the class up to 10th level. They did this for no other class.
First of all they did not rewrite the first 10 levels of it. Otherwise there would not be an issue over how the level 7 works and how much of it does or doesn't become redundant because of the new optional beast templates that are now available.
They have literally only done minor tweaks. If they had done rewriteups for these things we wouldn't have a mixed issue over the level 7 power and they likely would have looked at the level 11 power to make sure that it falls in line more clearly and easily since it's so close to 10 and a major point where a lot of classes get things of this kind of nature so would have been a stopping point to look at closely anyway. Where as 10 is just an arbitrary middle number that has no more meaning than being half of 20 and almost none of the class structures are actually built around that being in any way significant. Which they would know when looking at things.
All they primarily tried to work on and rewrite is the issue of the beast itself and how it interacted with the players actions. That's all they've ever done. Even in the UA. Even the General Class Option Changes that they released in Tasha's are not actually everything up to level 10. They are just the two sets of class options that People complain about the most out of the entire set that are offered and are still in ranges that see general play. There was no entire rewrite and rebalance of the class up to that number. They never even state as much. They just say they listened to various places and made some response changes to Lessen Complaints about the class in general and one sticking point about the BM in particular.
No way...they make each and every feature completely different up to 10th level.
Thats not "minor tweaks"
They do not. All of the changes are at level 2 and 3. Except for Martial Versatility which is not even Ranger Specific. That was a feature basically dumped as an option on just about all of the classes in the book in some form in allowing you to change some alternate base class feature for another. It doesn't count.
Everything else is just the level 2 and level 3 ability and as necessary some allowance was made for the replacement of those abilities in the new ability for the level 6 ability but that's because the level 6 ability is still just the level 2 and 3 abilities and nothing more. As is the one change to level 14 and one of the changes to level 10.
and what they changed is instead of additional ways the old ones work for you. They are either a minor increase in damage. Or an increase to your movement mechanic. And while I consider the movement mechanic alterations and increases of this power to be the actual important power in that option. While I know others are chomping at the bit at the idea of that expertise in the first ability. I don't. I feel like it's just a quarter feat stuck in there to trick us with "Oooo. Shiny."
And I consider the few temporary hitpoints and the ribbon ability of getting rid of exhaustion almost as pointless as most people find the Hide in Plain Sight Ability. Temporary hp is not that great. It's only boon at all is that they can stack on top of normal hitpoints above your maximum. But when your missing a bunch of health. it's basically just a tiny damage absorption shield which you hope is going to keep you alive long enough for somebody else to heal you proper or the fight to end so you can rest.
1st-level ranger feature, which replaces the Natural Explorer feature
Favored Foe
1st-level ranger feature, which replaces the Favored Enemy feature and works with the Foe Slayer feature
Primal Awareness
3rd-level ranger feature, which replaces the Primeval Awareness feature
Nature’s Veil
10th-level ranger feature, which replaces the Hide in Plain Sight feature
If you find them underwhelming that is one thing...but this is hardly "minor tweaks" as you are replacing 4 core features of the ranger for something very different. Primal Awareness like literally adds several spells to your list. 10th level feature is VASTLY different than Hide in plain sight.
Overall its replacing the craptastic features that people specifically rate very low. WotC listened as the community spoke about how underwhelming these features were and gave us new ones.
They are not as good as the UA but they are for SURE different enough to not just be "minor tweaks".
Wizards staff has said they have no intention of removing the old version. They said they wanted new features to never be "the always Better choice". They still want to keep the old ones viable for the players that only buy the PHB. The problem with the core ranger abilities is not everyone can figure out how to use them. The core ranger stopped meeting their satisfaction standard (which is 60-70% I think) there is actually about a 50/50 divide on most satisfaction charts. Rangers do have the problem of a higher percent of dissatisfied Players wanting to play the class when they all can't even agree what defines the archetype. other classes with dissatisfied players tend to just encourage players to try a different class not so with the ranger.(except for the scout rouge crowd). Their solution was to allow an optionfor those who didn't feel the mechanics worked for them (IMO due to personality traits) because the two groups would never like the same mechanics.
If You don't like the original mechanics fine but don't call optional features a rewrite.
This whole post is about which feature is better. The answer is they are different. Some people will want one and not the other. some people will want both. Having the option is a good thing. Make the call situationally based on build and player personality just like any other choice in the game.
1. If wizards will not remove the old version then the only way to fix it is to offer a rewrite as an option.
2. The mechanics offered in Tasha's is that rewrite of the class (and subclass) offered as an option.
One side can call it an option not a rewrite because it is presented as an option, while the other side can say its a rewrite that they offer as an option (because they have made an editorial decision to not do a full replacement for accessibility reasons). Or we can keep arguing over semantics instead of discussing Favored Foe vs. Hunter's Mark.
Which in my opinion FF is weaker than HM, but interesting in its own right and not completely useless as its mechanic offer different uses. Its too bad they don't stack.
1st-level ranger feature, which replaces the Natural Explorer feature
Favored Foe
1st-level ranger feature, which replaces the Favored Enemy feature and works with the Foe Slayer feature
Primal Awareness
3rd-level ranger feature, which replaces the Primeval Awareness feature
Nature’s Veil
10th-level ranger feature, which replaces the Hide in Plain Sight feature
If you find them underwhelming that is one thing...but this is hardly "minor tweaks" as you are replacing 4 core features of the ranger for something very different. Primal Awareness like literally adds several spells to your list. 10th level feature is VASTLY different than Hide in plain sight.
Overall its replacing the craptastic features that people specifically rate very low. WotC listened as the community spoke about how underwhelming these features were and gave us new ones.
They are not as good as the UA but they are for SURE different enough to not just be "minor tweaks".
They are still minor tweaks. Half of those abilities aren't actually even dramatic differences to what they provide. Your just being biased and wanting to see the Ranger as a whole new class because of these abilities. The reality is that it is not a whole new class. It's an optionally capable alternative to most of what the class is already doing.
There are all kinds of examples that I can do but I'm going to go for an easy one. The level 10 ability. They both do the exact same thing. They hide you for some period of time.
The old one is potentially indefinitely but your stationary while using it. But it's also non-magical and it can't simply be seen through by most magics or detectable by various detection magics.
The new one you basically as a bonus action cast invisibility on yourself without bothering about S,V,M issues. But it only lasts for a turn. Various kinds of magic can see through it. It's detectable by various means even if they do not see you. But at least your mobile and able to move around and take certain kinds of actions while it is in effect.
This is an outright trade off and nothing more than a tweak. This isn't some dramatic new ability with whole new implications. It's actually worse in many ways but it has less restrictions on using it for being worse.
And this is just one of the abilities your so focused on and calling a rewrite.
And then there is facts like what Rosco brings up to add to the equation and the fact that these new abilities can be mixed and matched with the old abilities. Allowing you to have Favored Enemy or Natural Explorer if you wish or you can have Favored Foe and Deft Explorer as well.
There is no dramatic recreation of the class that makes all of the old stuff invalid like your trying to paint it to be. And there isn't any more changed than what is necessary to address a total of 3 abilities total. The original level 2 ability, the original level 3 ability, and the original level 10 ability. That's it.
If they were rewriting everything up to level 10. There is room and potential for changing the level 8 ability or having wrapped it up in something like Deft Explorer as part of it's function and given us something new. There is nothing game changing or breaking really about providing that power earlier and many would have seen it as beefing up any option or change made to Natural explorer. But they did not do this because they did not rewrite the class. They tweaked the class and only in the abilities that were specifically being complained about.
What gets real fun is when you take Favored enemy and deft explorer or favored foe and favored terrain. Or favored Foe and PHB beastmaster because the ranger is making less attacks so favored foe is more suitable than Hunters mark. allowing other use of the spell known slot. This allows al ot more ranger tailoring bringing up the overall satisfaction of the class if people could just get past "PHB Ranger=bad" . Dms and players might be a lot more willing to see the value of the core ranger abilities if they have only one "situational" ability to think about.
When it comes down to it I prefer "A hunters mark + Favored enemy" over "favored Foe + hunters mark" or "favored foe + different spell ". I like to take a spell casting feat before level 5.(usually via race) but that's just preference and I wouldn't hold any one else to that standard.
I don't see myself giving up Favored Enemy, but I could see Natural Explorer giving way to Deft Explorer in a dungeon crawl or urban campaign. Heck, it might even be a good choice for Tyranny of Dragons, since you spend so little time off the beaten path.
What gets real fun is when you take Favored enemy and deft explorer or favored foe and favored terrain. Or favored Foe and PHB beastmaster because the ranger is making less attacks so favored foe is more suitable than Hunters mark. allowing other use of the spell known slot. This allows al ot more ranger tailoring bringing up the overall satisfaction of the class if people could just get past "PHB Ranger=bad" . Dms and players might be a lot more willing to see the value of the core ranger abilities if they have only one "situational" ability to think about.
When it comes down to it I prefer "A hunters mark + Favored enemy" over "favored Foe + hunters mark" or "favored foe + different spell ". I like to take a spell casting feat before level 5.(usually via race) but that's just preference and I wouldn't hold any one else to that standard.
Favored Enemy + deft explorer actually has a hidden benefit. it ends up being a bunch of additional languages over time. Because deft explorer gives you 2. But Favored enemy actually gives you a language each time you pick up another favored enemy which means 3 more. So that's a potential for 5 languages on top of your racial language and any languages you pick up from things like your backgrounds. You could probably end up with at least 8 with a high level ranger with this pairing.
Overall though I am kind of ambivilant over the choice between Favored Enemy and Favored Foe. You get a bit of extra damage just whenever you want it and potentially less reliance on Hunter's Mark for damage. But you lose the ability to gain advantage in tracking certain kinds of foes and understand them better without as much investment in intelligence and you actually gain a new reliance on Hunters mark because It's actually the only way to track that enemy your doing extra damage to if it gets away from you somehow. So it seems like mostly a wash to me in the end.
Natural explorer and Deft Explorer is a far more interesting choice to me that i'd have to consider a lot more. They are both things involved with how you interact and explore your environments but they do it with very different bonuses and limitations. Both have abilities that are quite useful and abilities that are probably not that useful in practice But Natural Explorer is a lot more about how you navigate your way through an area as well as the group you are with and has a lot of bonuses that even Expertise in Survival just will not give you but it has the limitation of the kind of environments you get these enhanced bonuses in. While Deft Explorer is much more limited in those navigation capacities or in how those navigation abilities actually help your party but has bonuses to how you actually move through that environment you navigate and your Expertise does not actually have to be in Survival despite that being what many would assume is the natural or only pick.
Overall they both make for interesting little tweaks.
I don't see myself giving up Favored Enemy, but I could see Natural Explorer giving way to Deft Explorer in a dungeon crawl or urban campaign. Heck, it might even be a good choice for Tyranny of Dragons, since you spend so little time off the beaten path.
More city settings and kind of set location/region/area settings are where I find Favored enemy actually at it's strongest. In city settings or more social settings is actually where I take advantage of Favored Enemy's ability to pick up two kinds of humanoid races and I pick two that I expect to be dealing with alot or in conflict with.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The fact WotC has done two full rewrites of the class with special focus on the trash fires that are these two abilities is more than enough evidence that either: they dislike the class, the community dislikes the class, or most likely BOTH dislike the class and have wanted to fix it for some time.
Two full rewrites? Now you're just making stuff up. Mearls dabbled here and there with his Happy Fun Hour, but he messed with everything. There have been two UAs; the first of which only took them up through 5th-level. The Ranger, Revised is the more famous of the two, and goes all the way to 20, but WotC also knew it would never see publication.
Makes it really hard to take you seriously when you lie like that.
Revised Ranger UA: https://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/downloads/UA_RevisedRanger.pdf
And "WotC also knew it would never see publication" is a complete fabrication as there is no evidence to this.
Tasha's Ranger: Literally rewrote almost the entire class.
I already mentioned the Ranger, Revised. You didn't need to post a link to it.
And no, Tasha's did not rewrite almost the entire class. if you're not going to take this seriously, you're getting the block button.
Dude....they rewrote all the features 10th level and below......I am not sue how this is not a rewrite.
You honestly have a huge sense of denial about this and it shows.
I would like to quote the revised ranger UA:
"The planning phase goes back to our review of playtest feedback. We review data and read anecdotes on Reddit, forums, and social media. We try to decide if addressing the issue is worth the potential disruption to the game. In this case, we felt that a few factors combined to push for a change. Many players want to play rangers, but few were happy with the class, which held its place at the bottom of class power rankings by a significant margin. The class’s individual features also filled the top-ten list of lowest-rated individual character features."
The community voted on these features...they found them to be lacking. There is no discussion here. WotC admitted it in the UA that people disliked the features. Its very very very clear.
I am not sure how you can look at this and say "Nah the majority of people like this..."
They ended up rewriting the core abilities for the class up to 10th level. They did this for no other class.
The obtuse nature by which you want to cling to the idea that these optional features are also not a rewrite is crazy to me....
They literally took the feature and wrote it again so as to alter or improve it. If you pick it it replaces the old feature....they did this for 1 class and 1 class only.
To pretend it is not in any way related to the concerns for the class in the past is straight denial.....
First of all they did not rewrite the first 10 levels of it. Otherwise there would not be an issue over how the level 7 works and how much of it does or doesn't become redundant because of the new optional beast templates that are now available.
They have literally only done minor tweaks. If they had done rewriteups for these things we wouldn't have a mixed issue over the level 7 power and they likely would have looked at the level 11 power to make sure that it falls in line more clearly and easily since it's so close to 10 and a major point where a lot of classes get things of this kind of nature so would have been a stopping point to look at closely anyway. Where as 10 is just an arbitrary middle number that has no more meaning than being half of 20 and almost none of the class structures are actually built around that being in any way significant. Which they would know when looking at things.
All they primarily tried to work on and rewrite is the issue of the beast itself and how it interacted with the players actions. That's all they've ever done. Even in the UA. Even the General Class Option Changes that they released in Tasha's are not actually everything up to level 10. They are just the two sets of class options that People complain about the most out of the entire set that are offered and are still in ranges that see general play. There was no entire rewrite and rebalance of the class up to that number. They never even state as much. They just say they listened to various places and made some response changes to Lessen Complaints about the class in general and one sticking point about the BM in particular.
No way...they make each and every feature completely different up to 10th level.
Thats not "minor tweaks"
The 2015 UA ranger, the 2016 UA revised ranger, and the 2019 CFV (including ranger) are all dead in the water. Tried and abandoned.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7A6-yOZC_s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_pFVwBwgSA
I mean yeah...this is ultimately what they came up with.
My point being is that SEVERAL times throughout the life span of this system has tried to fix the issues with ranger. They all failed because they ultimately did not address the issues with ranger in a way that people felt good about them.
Tasha's met with great success in UA form and they moved forward with them.
But my point still stands....the community wanted something different and ultimately got it.
I think a large portion of the community wanted something different out of the ranger because of the way they play the game. Still do. Always will. But I know a portion of the community (I would argue large portion, but I'm biased in that direction) like the ranger the way it is because of the way they play the game. Still do. Always will. I think a big book of class options, official options, was an elegant compromise on WotC's part, taking the heat off them for making either wrong/bad decision and letting those who like whatever do whatever, officially.
They do not. All of the changes are at level 2 and 3. Except for Martial Versatility which is not even Ranger Specific. That was a feature basically dumped as an option on just about all of the classes in the book in some form in allowing you to change some alternate base class feature for another. It doesn't count.
Everything else is just the level 2 and level 3 ability and as necessary some allowance was made for the replacement of those abilities in the new ability for the level 6 ability but that's because the level 6 ability is still just the level 2 and 3 abilities and nothing more. As is the one change to level 14 and one of the changes to level 10.
and what they changed is instead of additional ways the old ones work for you. They are either a minor increase in damage. Or an increase to your movement mechanic. And while I consider the movement mechanic alterations and increases of this power to be the actual important power in that option. While I know others are chomping at the bit at the idea of that expertise in the first ability. I don't. I feel like it's just a quarter feat stuck in there to trick us with "Oooo. Shiny."
And I consider the few temporary hitpoints and the ribbon ability of getting rid of exhaustion almost as pointless as most people find the Hide in Plain Sight Ability. Temporary hp is not that great. It's only boon at all is that they can stack on top of normal hitpoints above your maximum. But when your missing a bunch of health. it's basically just a tiny damage absorption shield which you hope is going to keep you alive long enough for somebody else to heal you proper or the fight to end so you can rest.
No....
Deft Explorer
1st-level ranger feature, which replaces the Natural Explorer feature
Favored Foe
1st-level ranger feature, which replaces the Favored Enemy feature and works with the Foe Slayer feature
Primal Awareness
3rd-level ranger feature, which replaces the Primeval Awareness feature
Nature’s Veil
10th-level ranger feature, which replaces the Hide in Plain Sight feature
If you find them underwhelming that is one thing...but this is hardly "minor tweaks" as you are replacing 4 core features of the ranger for something very different. Primal Awareness like literally adds several spells to your list. 10th level feature is VASTLY different than Hide in plain sight.
Overall its replacing the craptastic features that people specifically rate very low. WotC listened as the community spoke about how underwhelming these features were and gave us new ones.
They are not as good as the UA but they are for SURE different enough to not just be "minor tweaks".
Wizards staff has said they have no intention of removing the old version. They said they wanted new features to never be "the always Better choice". They still want to keep the old ones viable for the players that only buy the PHB. The problem with the core ranger abilities is not everyone can figure out how to use them. The core ranger stopped meeting their satisfaction standard (which is 60-70% I think) there is actually about a 50/50 divide on most satisfaction charts. Rangers do have the problem of a higher percent of dissatisfied Players wanting to play the class when they all can't even agree what defines the archetype. other classes with dissatisfied players tend to just encourage players to try a different class not so with the ranger.(except for the scout rouge crowd). Their solution was to allow an option for those who didn't feel the mechanics worked for them (IMO due to personality traits) because the two groups would never like the same mechanics.
If You don't like the original mechanics fine but don't call optional features a rewrite.
This whole post is about which feature is better. The answer is they are different. Some people will want one and not the other. some people will want both. Having the option is a good thing. Make the call situationally based on build and player personality just like any other choice in the game.
We could also say both sides are correct:
1. If wizards will not remove the old version then the only way to fix it is to offer a rewrite as an option.
2. The mechanics offered in Tasha's is that rewrite of the class (and subclass) offered as an option.
One side can call it an option not a rewrite because it is presented as an option, while the other side can say its a rewrite that they offer as an option (because they have made an editorial decision to not do a full replacement for accessibility reasons). Or we can keep arguing over semantics instead of discussing Favored Foe vs. Hunter's Mark.
Which in my opinion FF is weaker than HM, but interesting in its own right and not completely useless as its mechanic offer different uses. Its too bad they don't stack.
They are still minor tweaks. Half of those abilities aren't actually even dramatic differences to what they provide. Your just being biased and wanting to see the Ranger as a whole new class because of these abilities. The reality is that it is not a whole new class. It's an optionally capable alternative to most of what the class is already doing.
There are all kinds of examples that I can do but I'm going to go for an easy one. The level 10 ability. They both do the exact same thing. They hide you for some period of time.
The old one is potentially indefinitely but your stationary while using it. But it's also non-magical and it can't simply be seen through by most magics or detectable by various detection magics.
The new one you basically as a bonus action cast invisibility on yourself without bothering about S,V,M issues. But it only lasts for a turn. Various kinds of magic can see through it. It's detectable by various means even if they do not see you. But at least your mobile and able to move around and take certain kinds of actions while it is in effect.
This is an outright trade off and nothing more than a tweak. This isn't some dramatic new ability with whole new implications. It's actually worse in many ways but it has less restrictions on using it for being worse.
And this is just one of the abilities your so focused on and calling a rewrite.
And then there is facts like what Rosco brings up to add to the equation and the fact that these new abilities can be mixed and matched with the old abilities. Allowing you to have Favored Enemy or Natural Explorer if you wish or you can have Favored Foe and Deft Explorer as well.
There is no dramatic recreation of the class that makes all of the old stuff invalid like your trying to paint it to be. And there isn't any more changed than what is necessary to address a total of 3 abilities total. The original level 2 ability, the original level 3 ability, and the original level 10 ability. That's it.
If they were rewriting everything up to level 10. There is room and potential for changing the level 8 ability or having wrapped it up in something like Deft Explorer as part of it's function and given us something new. There is nothing game changing or breaking really about providing that power earlier and many would have seen it as beefing up any option or change made to Natural explorer. But they did not do this because they did not rewrite the class. They tweaked the class and only in the abilities that were specifically being complained about.
What gets real fun is when you take Favored enemy and deft explorer or favored foe and favored terrain. Or favored Foe and PHB beastmaster because the ranger is making less attacks so favored foe is more suitable than Hunters mark. allowing other use of the spell known slot. This allows al ot more ranger tailoring bringing up the overall satisfaction of the class if people could just get past "PHB Ranger=bad" . Dms and players might be a lot more willing to see the value of the core ranger abilities if they have only one "situational" ability to think about.
When it comes down to it I prefer "A hunters mark + Favored enemy" over "favored Foe + hunters mark" or "favored foe + different spell ". I like to take a spell casting feat before level 5.(usually via race) but that's just preference and I wouldn't hold any one else to that standard.
I don't see myself giving up Favored Enemy, but I could see Natural Explorer giving way to Deft Explorer in a dungeon crawl or urban campaign. Heck, it might even be a good choice for Tyranny of Dragons, since you spend so little time off the beaten path.
Favored Enemy + deft explorer actually has a hidden benefit. it ends up being a bunch of additional languages over time. Because deft explorer gives you 2. But Favored enemy actually gives you a language each time you pick up another favored enemy which means 3 more. So that's a potential for 5 languages on top of your racial language and any languages you pick up from things like your backgrounds. You could probably end up with at least 8 with a high level ranger with this pairing.
Overall though I am kind of ambivilant over the choice between Favored Enemy and Favored Foe. You get a bit of extra damage just whenever you want it and potentially less reliance on Hunter's Mark for damage. But you lose the ability to gain advantage in tracking certain kinds of foes and understand them better without as much investment in intelligence and you actually gain a new reliance on Hunters mark because It's actually the only way to track that enemy your doing extra damage to if it gets away from you somehow. So it seems like mostly a wash to me in the end.
Natural explorer and Deft Explorer is a far more interesting choice to me that i'd have to consider a lot more. They are both things involved with how you interact and explore your environments but they do it with very different bonuses and limitations. Both have abilities that are quite useful and abilities that are probably not that useful in practice But Natural Explorer is a lot more about how you navigate your way through an area as well as the group you are with and has a lot of bonuses that even Expertise in Survival just will not give you but it has the limitation of the kind of environments you get these enhanced bonuses in. While Deft Explorer is much more limited in those navigation capacities or in how those navigation abilities actually help your party but has bonuses to how you actually move through that environment you navigate and your Expertise does not actually have to be in Survival despite that being what many would assume is the natural or only pick.
Overall they both make for interesting little tweaks.
More city settings and kind of set location/region/area settings are where I find Favored enemy actually at it's strongest. In city settings or more social settings is actually where I take advantage of Favored Enemy's ability to pick up two kinds of humanoid races and I pick two that I expect to be dealing with alot or in conflict with.