This is the main difficulty with multi-classing in general; a lot of classes and sub-classes get some really good stuff early on, so even one or two level dips can give you a lot of great benefits very quickly, but it also delays features from your other class(es) that may be more important long term, so you really need to have a good idea of what it is you want multi-classing for.
There aren't many classes, martial ones in particular, that can't benefit from a Fighter's Action Surge for big spikes in damage, or a level or two in Barbarian to add a huge amount of tanking potential and so-on. But whether either of these is a good fit depends a lot on what you actually want out of a character, or what role you see it filling in your group.
These hybrid Fighter/Rogue/Ranger builds are all about building a single character that can do more individual damage, but unless you're doing it really wrong then you shouldn't be playing D&D on your own; while dealing extra damage will rarely hurt, if it comes at the cost of party utility (having someone who can sneak, scout, set traps etc.) it's not necessarily better. Furthermore, sometimes dealing raw damage isn't the best way to deal more damage; a well timed control spell can nerf your enemy, and/or give your allies advantage when attacking it, which can actually result in a far larger damage boost (or keep your party up) than just doing a bit more damage yourself. Remember; every crit or hit that wouldn't have happened without your feature/spell is extra damage that you caused, never let your party forget that 😉.
But ultimately, and most importantly, none of that matters. The first and most important reason to do anything in D&D is what makes your character interesting; dealing lots of damage might be statistically important, but if combat for you is just a repetitive loop, and then you spend the rest of the time standing around like a wooden post waiting for more combat to happen, then what is the point? Every decision you make when levelling a character should start with the question "What is the best fit for the character I'm trying to play as?". While you can absolutely consider if a choice is a strong or weak one, when you start going overboard on meta-gaming and number crunching it takes away the most important part of the game, which is that it's about roleplaying as a character, not optimising for the highest possible numbers.
The biggest benefit of multi-classing (and feats) is when it gives you access to something that you feel your character should have to fit their theme; you can absolutely consider whether it's an optimal choice (and if there might be other alternatives), but character should always come first IMO.
What would make your Gloomstalker better fit the theme you're going for?
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.
Even without assassinate a Ranger + Rogue + Fighter multiclass will probably do more damage than pure Ranger.
Yeah, it's worth noting favored foe is both worse than Hunter's Mark in terms of net damage dealt on anything with 2 or more attacks and has broadly worse scaling, although it has excellent action economy, as it costs no action at all. It's not that big a gamechanger.
Multiclassing generally does weaken builds, but if you do it right, the DPS for Gloomstalkers can be vicious.
I'm a Gloomstalker 5/ Forge Cleric 2 - usually ranged, but I get into melee with dual shortswords about half the time. The domain spells for Forge (Searing Smite and Magic Weapon in particular) complement rangers very nicely, as they have the benefit of being bonus actions. Also, giving a ranger access to Spiritual Weapon is kind of a recipe for insane DPS since it isn't concentration AND they can still use their attack action when they cast it. Plus, going from half-caster to full-caster allows for decent damage scaling from spells like Guiding Bolt, Searing Smite, and Inflict Wounds.
Basically, my ranger/cleric always the biggest threat on the battlefield. And since I usually cast Zephyr Strike, she also is very mobile and very hard to hit.
Multiclassing generally does weaken builds, but if you do it right, the DPS for Gloomstalkers can be vicious.
I'm a Gloomstalker 5/ Forge Cleric 2 - usually ranged, but I get into melee with dual shortswords about half the time. The domain spells for Forge (Searing Smite and Magic Weapon in particular) complement rangers very nicely, as they have the benefit of being bonus actions. Also, giving a ranger access to Spiritual Weapon is kind of a recipe for insane DPS since it isn't concentration AND they can still use their attack action when they cast it. Plus, going from half-caster to full-caster allows for decent damage scaling from spells like Guiding Bolt, Searing Smite, and Inflict Wounds.
Basically, my ranger/cleric always the biggest threat on the battlefield. And since I usually cast Zephyr Strike, she also is very mobile and very hard to hit.
Searing smite and magic weapon are already in the extra spells from tasha's so you only gain a heavy armor profiency and some minor extra resources... Which is not ideal. You gain more spending 2 other levels on gloomstalker for class progression than getting this I feel. Like the second ASI at level 8 is huge.
I as well have a cleric gloom stalker. Mine is Arcana. The ability to continuously upcast spells once you have two levels of cleric is very nice and your wealth of spell options gives you a ton of advantages in more situations.
Once you have 5 levels of Ranger your DPS floor with Hunter's Mark and extra attack is always going to be reasonable. So adding versatility and other ways to damage and contribute can help more than a few more levels of Ranger. One of the weirder pieces of math I have found is that it is almost always better to cast bless as a Ranger compared to casting Hunter's Mark. If you have a cleric in the party even more, because now they can use their concentration on a more valuable spell.
Multiclassing generally does weaken builds, but if you do it right, the DPS for Gloomstalkers can be vicious.
I'm a Gloomstalker 5/ Forge Cleric 2 - usually ranged, but I get into melee with dual shortswords about half the time. The domain spells for Forge (Searing Smite and Magic Weapon in particular) complement rangers very nicely, as they have the benefit of being bonus actions. Also, giving a ranger access to Spiritual Weapon is kind of a recipe for insane DPS since it isn't concentration AND they can still use their attack action when they cast it. Plus, going from half-caster to full-caster allows for decent damage scaling from spells like Guiding Bolt, Searing Smite, and Inflict Wounds.
Basically, my ranger/cleric always the biggest threat on the battlefield. And since I usually cast Zephyr Strike, she also is very mobile and very hard to hit.
Searing smite and magic weapon are already in the extra spells from tasha's so you only gain a heavy armor profiency and some minor extra resources... Which is not ideal. You gain more spending 2 other levels on gloomstalker for class progression than getting this I feel. Like the second ASI at level 8 is huge.
They weren't when I multiclassed two years ago. And not all DMs allow Tasha's content.
Yep. In conversation I almost never stray from the PHB unless the topic is specifically based on something outside of that. But, just like feats and multiclassing, many players assume or prefer that the default is to have zero restrictions, limitations, or lack of options open to them.
I don't think you're crazy to think that, but I don't think that it's crazy to MC out of gloomstalker either. It really depends on what you're looking for. With the MC build, instead of the cool things that a GS gets, you're getting other cool things instead. I wouldn't say that one route is inherently better than the other either way.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
What I have tried in the past was to plan my Ranger builds starting one level in Fighter and getting CON prof + additional FS + Second Wind + occasionally useful Heavy Armor. DEX save effects are not that bad and you’ll have high DEX anyways.
You can always get Defense to improve your AC and follow-up with regular Archery/TWF/Dueling. Or even go crazier and try to exploit Blind Fighting alongside Fog Cloud.
My latest Ranger was a Goblin Urchin who also played like a Rogue-light version for our group. What I did was to get Archery FS from the 1st Fighter level and then I got Druidic Warrior from my Ranger FS, I added Guidance and Mending cantrips to improve my versatility and because my DM really account for ammunition, so Mending helped circumvent that for my arrows. Then I went straight Ranger up to level 8 (character level 9) and go back to Fighter 2 at level 10 to go crazy nova with Action Surge and Dread Ambusher.
He was a pretty durable, versatile and effective Ranger.
I have had tremendous fun playing a gloomstalker battlemaster multiclass with a variant human (sharpshooter). Devastating Alpha striker from range. Now with extra attack and action surge there is the option of a first round action with six attacks or two four attack rounds.
Almost every time I read these discussions about multiclassing vs single classing it seems to come down to how much damage you can do in a single round - preplanned metagaming for a video game basically. One way to look at these characters is to ask: which would you rather take to deal with an ancient spell using dragon in their lair? A) 2 triple classed adventurers that total 6 different classes and 40 levels ad no level above 15 B) 6 triple classed adventurers that total 6 classes and 120 levels but no level above 15 C) 6 single classes that give you the same 6 classes but total 120 levels and all are level 20
i don’t know about you but I think I would prefer choice C ad it’s that decision that really points out the OP’s question or thought - in the end single class characters bring stuff to the table that no multiclass character can bring and you really need to do a level by level “What would this character do at this point in his life given his personality? Sort of progression analysis to see if your theory crafting makes any sense roleplay wise.
.…in the end single class characters bring stuff to the table that no multiclass character can bring and you really need to do a level by level “What would this character do at this point in his life given his personality? Sort of progression analysis to see if your theory crafting makes any sense roleplay wise.
More than just that, to really make the most informed (and therefore most applicable) decisions possible requires two very specific pieces of information. The first piece you cannot even begin to predict until after the campaign has already started. The second is impossible to collect until the character is already close to that level.
What can nobody in the party do, and how bad can that leave (or has left) us screwed?
What types of shenanigans is the party up to (or recently been up to)? What does that bode i the likely future?
I gotta tell ya, if I’m playing a Bard in a party full of all martial characters and gishes, I’ma lean into mah’ spellzcastin’ an’ magical repertoire regarding general magicy-ness and healin’s a bit more. If I’m that same bard in a party full of Wizards and Sorcerers, I’ma try an’ find ways to cover they squishy asses if I can, as my d8 hit die and light armor proficiency would likely make me the best tank. Even which spells I learned would have to be different by necessity.
People chance DPR in a vacuum, but combat works better with synergy. Sometimes, everyone pursing individual damage output with little to no thoughts on teamwork still works, sometimes it works in spite of itself, and sometimes it just don’t work well at all.
Almost every time I read these discussions about multiclassing vs single classing it seems to come down to how much damage you can do in a single round - preplanned metagaming for a video game basically. One way to look at these characters is to ask: which would you rather take to deal with an ancient spell using dragon in their lair? A) 2 triple classed adventurers that total 6 different classes and 40 levels ad no level above 15 B) 6 triple classed adventurers that total 6 classes and 120 levels but no level above 15 C) 6 single classes that give you the same 6 classes but total 120 levels and all are level 20
i don’t know about you but I think I would prefer choice C ad it’s that decision that really points out the OP’s question or thought - in the end single class characters bring stuff to the table that no multiclass character can bring and you really need to do a level by level “What would this character do at this point in his life given his personality? Sort of progression analysis to see if your theory crafting makes any sense roleplay wise.
Although level 20 ranger is a bit rubbish, a single level of something else can offer more, the other 19 levels are worth it :)
The L20 Ranger ability is particularly subject to objective math - it's not a question of "playing it poorly". Literally all you get is a hit die and Foe Slayer. It's particularly trivial to analyze, and like with many classes, the Ranger capstone is pretty bad. For example, if we don't assume access to magic weapons (which is how 5E is allegedly designed), 100% of Rangers are better off as Ranger 19/Forge Cleric 1 than Ranger 20, and that's not even subclass specific - the Forge power is simply better than the Ranger capstone unless you can't use the Forge power because you already have a magic weapon.
If you took the L2 spell magic weapon why do you need the blessings of the forge? Cast as a L4 you get a +2 weapon. And then you add foe slayer and add at least +1 and probably +3 to the to hit of an attack each round forge cleric 1 isn’t bad but it’s not essential even in a zero magic game.
I dunno if I would class Foe Slayer as very strong in terms of being a capstone ability. Capstones I consider very strong are Barbarian: +2 to hit +2 damage to every attack (in most cases), +40 hp and unlimited number of Rages. Artificer: up to +6 (+8 for Armorers) to saving throws and potentially survive up to 6 (or 8) hits that would drop you to 0 hp. Druid: Unlimited Wildshape, and basically free Subtle Spell metamagic on ALL their spells.
Not quite sure the Foe Slayer can quite measure up to those. I feel its more in line with the Fighter or Rogue capstone. Which is a solid good rating.
If you took the L2 spell magic weapon why do you need the blessings of the forge? Cast as a L4 you get a +2 weapon. And then you add foe slayer and add at least +1 and probably +3 to the to hit of an attack each round forge cleric 1 isn’t bad but it’s not essential even in a zero magic game.
Sure, if you want to spend a spell known and however many slots you intend to burn on that - that just means you may want to shop around for something else.
Foe Slayer is strong. It’s subtle. But very strong.
There's some nuance to it, but it's not.... well, "very strong" is hard to answer, actually, because many capstones suck. It's entirely plausible Foe Slayer is in the top 50% of capstones. But it's certainly not as strong as many level 1 abilities. For example, the reason to prefer Foe Slayer to Archery is if you took Archery already as your style - it's not as powerful as Archery.
I'll try to put all of the game's capstones on a scale, but I make no promises that I'll get it right. In descending order, from best to worst:
Druid and Barbarian (Zealot) get infinite hit points; other Barbarian subclasses benefit differently from indefinite raging, and I'm not going to sort them all.
Fighters get a 20%-33.33% increase in DPR. Artificers get an ability that's nearly as good as the Paladin L6 ability - +28.57% to +66.67% to all saves, on top of being able to eat their 6 infusions for death gates.
Rogues can 1/rest force a miss to hit or force a failed ability check to have a 20 on the die. If they don't already have a way to do so, this grants them the ability to know when they fail an ability check.
Wizards become Warlocks but worse: pick 2 L3 spells and gain them as bonus spells prepared, and you can cast them each 1/rest for free. Everything of this tier or worse is worse than Fighter Action Surge, without question.
Sorcerers become pseudo-Warlocks, regaining 20% of their long rest resources every short rest. According to the given conversion rates between slots and sorcery points, this is officially supposed to be worse than the Wizard capstone, in terms of sheer power. This is also strictly worse than what you get for a 3-dip into Warlock (2 L2 spell slots are better than 4 sorcery points), which is why Sorlocks are so popular.
Clerics can 1/week do "anything", which would be tier 1 except that the guidance is to let this be any cleric spell, which is like 1/week casting a second L9 spell in the same day. By this point a Genielock has had infinite wishes for 4 levels.
Bard and Monk get the same capstone of if they use up their short rest powers, they get 20% of them each fight until they can short rest.
Warlocks can 1/long rest get their slots back in 1 minute instead of a short rest.
Impossible to sort: Paladin capstones are subclass specific. Usually, you get 1 minute (can be up to an hour) 1/long rest (2 subclasses can consume L5 slots to do it again) of gaining buffs that vary in utility by subclass, and Redemption is special because it gets absolutely incredible buffing that's always on, but it turns off against a given target until a long rest occurs if the Paladin attacks or casts a spell on them, which is almost everything you have a Paladin for.
You can decide for yourself where to put either of the Ranger capstones (PHB or Tasha's). I'd rank it at very close to the Wizard capstone, which would put it in the top half of capstones, despite still not being very good at all.
Once again, rangers, and for this conversation, paladins, need to account for their subclass abilities as well as the base class features at tier 3 and especially tier 4, just like you did for the zealot). The idea of level 20 having to, on it's very own, provide some kind of special "capstone" ability is not something the game design of classes supports in 5E. We have to weigh the features (subclass and class) of all of the tier 4 abilities all together, and even tier 3. If we look at what your top ranked classes (based on their "capstone" ability) gets throughout tier 4, and to some degree tier 3, we see that they probably need a solid level 20 ability to balance out that spread of levels. I'm not saying they get nothing, but I am saying it's a spread of balance.
Also, I really think rangers are balanced around their specific spells they have access to. I know this could be said for all spellcasters, and some don't like that specific spells should balance a class or subclass at all, but I don't think that is avoidable in this edition (so far). JC has even said that spells for rangers are more like class features for them. So things like a 4th or 5th level hail of thorns against a group of enemies, a 5th level conjure animals, plant growth, conjure woodland beings, pass without trace, fog cloud (paired with feral senses is murder!), and conjure volley all count towards the ranger class's balance at higher levels for me.
The spells and spell slots at tiers 3 and 4 mesh well with FE, vanish, the level 15 subclass ability, feral senses, and foe slayer. Much of what a ranger (especially the handbook ranger) does involves "striking" and the thematic mechanics of FE and NE, so foe slayer is a great compliment to all of this. If you are playing the type of game where the world emersion is less important than heroic combat, then the Tasha's favored foe is even stronger for this favored foe engine.
The favored foe math is strong. If you look at to-hit ratios it really packs a punch greater than it reads.
This is the main difficulty with multi-classing in general; a lot of classes and sub-classes get some really good stuff early on, so even one or two level dips can give you a lot of great benefits very quickly, but it also delays features from your other class(es) that may be more important long term, so you really need to have a good idea of what it is you want multi-classing for.
There aren't many classes, martial ones in particular, that can't benefit from a Fighter's Action Surge for big spikes in damage, or a level or two in Barbarian to add a huge amount of tanking potential and so-on. But whether either of these is a good fit depends a lot on what you actually want out of a character, or what role you see it filling in your group.
These hybrid Fighter/Rogue/Ranger builds are all about building a single character that can do more individual damage, but unless you're doing it really wrong then you shouldn't be playing D&D on your own; while dealing extra damage will rarely hurt, if it comes at the cost of party utility (having someone who can sneak, scout, set traps etc.) it's not necessarily better. Furthermore, sometimes dealing raw damage isn't the best way to deal more damage; a well timed control spell can nerf your enemy, and/or give your allies advantage when attacking it, which can actually result in a far larger damage boost (or keep your party up) than just doing a bit more damage yourself. Remember; every crit or hit that wouldn't have happened without your feature/spell is extra damage that you caused, never let your party forget that 😉.
But ultimately, and most importantly, none of that matters. The first and most important reason to do anything in D&D is what makes your character interesting; dealing lots of damage might be statistically important, but if combat for you is just a repetitive loop, and then you spend the rest of the time standing around like a wooden post waiting for more combat to happen, then what is the point? Every decision you make when levelling a character should start with the question "What is the best fit for the character I'm trying to play as?". While you can absolutely consider if a choice is a strong or weak one, when you start going overboard on meta-gaming and number crunching it takes away the most important part of the game, which is that it's about roleplaying as a character, not optimising for the highest possible numbers.
The biggest benefit of multi-classing (and feats) is when it gives you access to something that you feel your character should have to fit their theme; you can absolutely consider whether it's an optimal choice (and if there might be other alternatives), but character should always come first IMO.
What would make your Gloomstalker better fit the theme you're going for?
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.
Yeah, it's worth noting favored foe is both worse than Hunter's Mark in terms of net damage dealt on anything with 2 or more attacks and has broadly worse scaling, although it has excellent action economy, as it costs no action at all. It's not that big a gamechanger.
Multiclassing generally does weaken builds, but if you do it right, the DPS for Gloomstalkers can be vicious.
I'm a Gloomstalker 5/ Forge Cleric 2 - usually ranged, but I get into melee with dual shortswords about half the time. The domain spells for Forge (Searing Smite and Magic Weapon in particular) complement rangers very nicely, as they have the benefit of being bonus actions. Also, giving a ranger access to Spiritual Weapon is kind of a recipe for insane DPS since it isn't concentration AND they can still use their attack action when they cast it. Plus, going from half-caster to full-caster allows for decent damage scaling from spells like Guiding Bolt, Searing Smite, and Inflict Wounds.
Basically, my ranger/cleric always the biggest threat on the battlefield. And since I usually cast Zephyr Strike, she also is very mobile and very hard to hit.
Searing smite and magic weapon are already in the extra spells from tasha's so you only gain a heavy armor profiency and some minor extra resources... Which is not ideal. You gain more spending 2 other levels on gloomstalker for class progression than getting this I feel. Like the second ASI at level 8 is huge.
I as well have a cleric gloom stalker. Mine is Arcana. The ability to continuously upcast spells once you have two levels of cleric is very nice and your wealth of spell options gives you a ton of advantages in more situations.
Once you have 5 levels of Ranger your DPS floor with Hunter's Mark and extra attack is always going to be reasonable. So adding versatility and other ways to damage and contribute can help more than a few more levels of Ranger. One of the weirder pieces of math I have found is that it is almost always better to cast bless as a Ranger compared to casting Hunter's Mark. If you have a cleric in the party even more, because now they can use their concentration on a more valuable spell.
They weren't when I multiclassed two years ago. And not all DMs allow Tasha's content.
Yep. In conversation I almost never stray from the PHB unless the topic is specifically based on something outside of that. But, just like feats and multiclassing, many players assume or prefer that the default is to have zero restrictions, limitations, or lack of options open to them.
I don't think you're crazy to think that, but I don't think that it's crazy to MC out of gloomstalker either. It really depends on what you're looking for. With the MC build, instead of the cool things that a GS gets, you're getting other cool things instead. I wouldn't say that one route is inherently better than the other either way.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
What I have tried in the past was to plan my Ranger builds starting one level in Fighter and getting CON prof + additional FS + Second Wind + occasionally useful Heavy Armor. DEX save effects are not that bad and you’ll have high DEX anyways.
You can always get Defense to improve your AC and follow-up with regular Archery/TWF/Dueling. Or even go crazier and try to exploit Blind Fighting alongside Fog Cloud.
My latest Ranger was a Goblin Urchin who also played like a Rogue-light version for our group. What I did was to get Archery FS from the 1st Fighter level and then I got Druidic Warrior from my Ranger FS, I added Guidance and Mending cantrips to improve my versatility and because my DM really account for ammunition, so Mending helped circumvent that for my arrows. Then I went straight Ranger up to level 8 (character level 9) and go back to Fighter 2 at level 10 to go crazy nova with Action Surge and Dread Ambusher.
He was a pretty durable, versatile and effective Ranger.
I have had tremendous fun playing a gloomstalker battlemaster multiclass with a variant human (sharpshooter). Devastating Alpha striker from range. Now with extra attack and action surge there is the option of a first round action with six attacks or two four attack rounds.
Almost every time I read these discussions about multiclassing vs single classing it seems to come down to how much damage you can do in a single round - preplanned metagaming for a video game basically. One way to look at these characters is to ask: which would you rather take to deal with an ancient spell using dragon in their lair?
A) 2 triple classed adventurers that total 6 different classes and 40 levels ad no level above 15
B) 6 triple classed adventurers that total 6 classes and 120 levels but no level above 15
C) 6 single classes that give you the same 6 classes but total 120 levels and all are level 20
i don’t know about you but I think I would prefer choice C ad it’s that decision that really points out the OP’s question or thought - in the end single class characters bring stuff to the table that no multiclass character can bring and you really need to do a level by level “What would this character do at this point in his life given his personality? Sort of progression analysis to see if your theory crafting makes any sense roleplay wise.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
More than just that, to really make the most informed (and therefore most applicable) decisions possible requires two very specific pieces of information. The first piece you cannot even begin to predict until after the campaign has already started. The second is impossible to collect until the character is already close to that level.
I gotta tell ya, if I’m playing a Bard in a party full of all martial characters and gishes, I’ma lean into mah’ spellzcastin’ an’ magical repertoire regarding general magicy-ness and healin’s a bit more. If I’m that same bard in a party full of Wizards and Sorcerers, I’ma try an’ find ways to cover they squishy asses if I can, as my d8 hit die and light armor proficiency would likely make me the best tank. Even which spells I learned would have to be different by necessity.
People chance DPR in a vacuum, but combat works better with synergy. Sometimes, everyone pursing individual damage output with little to no thoughts on teamwork still works, sometimes it works in spite of itself, and sometimes it just don’t work well at all.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Although level 20 ranger is a bit rubbish, a single level of something else can offer more, the other 19 levels are worth it :)
Only if you play it poorly
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
The L20 Ranger ability is particularly subject to objective math - it's not a question of "playing it poorly". Literally all you get is a hit die and Foe Slayer. It's particularly trivial to analyze, and like with many classes, the Ranger capstone is pretty bad. For example, if we don't assume access to magic weapons (which is how 5E is allegedly designed), 100% of Rangers are better off as Ranger 19/Forge Cleric 1 than Ranger 20, and that's not even subclass specific - the Forge power is simply better than the Ranger capstone unless you can't use the Forge power because you already have a magic weapon.
If you took the L2 spell magic weapon why do you need the blessings of the forge? Cast as a L4 you get a +2 weapon. And then you add foe slayer and add at least +1 and probably +3 to the to hit of an attack each round forge cleric 1 isn’t bad but it’s not essential even in a zero magic game.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Foe Slayer is strong. It’s subtle. But very strong.
I dunno if I would class Foe Slayer as very strong in terms of being a capstone ability. Capstones I consider very strong are Barbarian: +2 to hit +2 damage to every attack (in most cases), +40 hp and unlimited number of Rages. Artificer: up to +6 (+8 for Armorers) to saving throws and potentially survive up to 6 (or 8) hits that would drop you to 0 hp. Druid: Unlimited Wildshape, and basically free Subtle Spell metamagic on ALL their spells.
Not quite sure the Foe Slayer can quite measure up to those. I feel its more in line with the Fighter or Rogue capstone. Which is a solid good rating.
Sure, if you want to spend a spell known and however many slots you intend to burn on that - that just means you may want to shop around for something else.
There's some nuance to it, but it's not.... well, "very strong" is hard to answer, actually, because many capstones suck. It's entirely plausible Foe Slayer is in the top 50% of capstones. But it's certainly not as strong as many level 1 abilities. For example, the reason to prefer Foe Slayer to Archery is if you took Archery already as your style - it's not as powerful as Archery.
I'll try to put all of the game's capstones on a scale, but I make no promises that I'll get it right. In descending order, from best to worst:
Impossible to sort: Paladin capstones are subclass specific. Usually, you get 1 minute (can be up to an hour) 1/long rest (2 subclasses can consume L5 slots to do it again) of gaining buffs that vary in utility by subclass, and Redemption is special because it gets absolutely incredible buffing that's always on, but it turns off against a given target until a long rest occurs if the Paladin attacks or casts a spell on them, which is almost everything you have a Paladin for.
You can decide for yourself where to put either of the Ranger capstones (PHB or Tasha's). I'd rank it at very close to the Wizard capstone, which would put it in the top half of capstones, despite still not being very good at all.
Once again, rangers, and for this conversation, paladins, need to account for their subclass abilities as well as the base class features at tier 3 and especially tier 4, just like you did for the zealot). The idea of level 20 having to, on it's very own, provide some kind of special "capstone" ability is not something the game design of classes supports in 5E. We have to weigh the features (subclass and class) of all of the tier 4 abilities all together, and even tier 3. If we look at what your top ranked classes (based on their "capstone" ability) gets throughout tier 4, and to some degree tier 3, we see that they probably need a solid level 20 ability to balance out that spread of levels. I'm not saying they get nothing, but I am saying it's a spread of balance.
Also, I really think rangers are balanced around their specific spells they have access to. I know this could be said for all spellcasters, and some don't like that specific spells should balance a class or subclass at all, but I don't think that is avoidable in this edition (so far). JC has even said that spells for rangers are more like class features for them. So things like a 4th or 5th level hail of thorns against a group of enemies, a 5th level conjure animals, plant growth, conjure woodland beings, pass without trace, fog cloud (paired with feral senses is murder!), and conjure volley all count towards the ranger class's balance at higher levels for me.
The spells and spell slots at tiers 3 and 4 mesh well with FE, vanish, the level 15 subclass ability, feral senses, and foe slayer. Much of what a ranger (especially the handbook ranger) does involves "striking" and the thematic mechanics of FE and NE, so foe slayer is a great compliment to all of this. If you are playing the type of game where the world emersion is less important than heroic combat, then the Tasha's favored foe is even stronger for this favored foe engine.
The favored foe math is strong. If you look at to-hit ratios it really packs a punch greater than it reads.