I really hope they change the saving throw proficiency. If so much of the class is going to be built around spamming a concentration spell, they should give them con proficiency. It does fit thematically with them being hardy folks on the edge of nature. Swap dex for con. Or if not, do something else to help them maintain concentration. Especially since melee rangers are going to be way more functional now.
They did give them something, concentration on HM won't be breakable by damage eventually. That's where the vast majority of lost concentration comes from.
War Caster is also a half-feat now and so is very easy to pick up.
im happy to see new faces wanting to try ranger! and most of the changes are good changes the main part ranger players is
1. you dont have some of your class features if you dont use hunters mark (including your capstone) 2. roving not able to be used with heavy armor (such a weird change that one) theres a few other small things but most of the hate is the hunters mark change. i havnt really heard anyone complain about the roving thing yet so that one maybe just me.
I'm not entirely sure what your point is supposed to be. If a druid doesn't use Wild Shape they lose out on some of their features too, including their capstone. A rogue who doesn't use Sneak Attack doesn't get to Cunning Strike and a Barbarian who doesn't Reckless Attack can't Brutal Strike. Features that build on or expect you to use other features are fine.
the hunters mark change was lazy and honestly bad. you are free to use it if you want its dnd live your life i know you already preordered the book lol but yea im not wasting my money on the 2024 stuff
I really hope they change the saving throw proficiency. If so much of the class is going to be built around spamming a concentration spell, they should give them con proficiency. It does fit thematically with them being hardy folks on the edge of nature. Swap dex for con. Or if not, do something else to help them maintain concentration. Especially since melee rangers are going to be way more functional now.
They did give them something, concentration on HM won't be breakable by damage eventually. That's where the vast majority of lost concentration comes from.
War Caster is also a half-feat now and so is very easy to pick up.
They do, but not until 13th level, which most people don’t get to. There is warcaster, but I’d think resilient con would be the better choice, with no cantrip, they miss on some of the warcaster benefits, and depending on components of other spells, warcaster might not be a great choice.
It just seems like it would be poor design to have multiple class features based on a concentration spell without giving them a little boost to maintain it through the levels where most people will be playing. And, again, con seems more thematic than dex for this version. With stuff like tireless.
They do, but not until 13th level, which most people don’t get to.
The ask was that they should get something to help with concentrating on it, and I was just pointing out that they did. Would I be upset if it were moved earlier, no - but it exists.
There is warcaster, but I’d think resilient con would be the better choice, with no cantrip, they miss on some of the warcaster benefits, and depending on components of other spells, warcaster might not be a great choice.
Yeah, Resilient Con is fine too. Either one boosts a secondary stat. Personally though I'd rather start with an evenn umber in Con.
It just seems like it would be poor design to have multiple class features based on a concentration spell without giving them a little boost to maintain it through the levels where most people will be playing. And, again, con seems more thematic than dex for this version. With stuff like tireless.
The thing is though, you get multiple free uses of that spell and it scales even when you cast it without a spell slot. If they make you drop concentration on it - just cast it again, it's not like it's costing you any slots. It doesn't even interfere with your attacks.
If we couldn't have the concentration free version - which, let's face it, would have been utterly busted with all the attacks a Ranger can get - this is the next best thing.
They do, but not until 13th level, which most people don’t get to.
The ask was that they should get something to help with concentrating on it, and I was just pointing out that they did. Would I be upset if it were moved earlier, no - but it exists.
There is warcaster, but I’d think resilient con would be the better choice, with no cantrip, they miss on some of the warcaster benefits, and depending on components of other spells, warcaster might not be a great choice.
Yeah, Resilient Con is fine too. Either one boosts a secondary stat. Personally though I'd rather start with an evenn umber in Con.
It just seems like it would be poor design to have multiple class features based on a concentration spell without giving them a little boost to maintain it through the levels where most people will be playing. And, again, con seems more thematic than dex for this version. With stuff like tireless.
The thing is though, you get multiple free uses of that spell and it scales even when you cast it without a spell slot. If they make you drop concentration on it - just cast it again, it's not like it's costing you any slots. It doesn't even interfere with your attacks.
If we couldn't have the concentration free version - which, let's face it, would have been utterly busted with all the attacks a Ranger can get - this is the next best thing.
was mainly waiting to see ranger but since this is the best they could muster ill just be kinda watching ig. "which, let's face it, would have been utterly busted with all the attacks a Ranger can get" isnt much damage compared to a wizards spells tbh but peace im out of here!
A wizard can't get that kind of damage out of a 1st-level slot. Level 1 HM lasts for an entire hour, you never need to upcast it, so getting a bunch for free will cover your entire day.
Oh, another buff to this Ranger from the UA that Treantmonk brought up - Nature's Veil now lasts till the end of your next turn rather than the start, and attacking still doesn't break it. So that's two rounds of concentration-free Quickened Greater Invisibility usable Wis times per day because you can activate it, move, full attack, then on your next turn, move, full attack again, and then either keep it going with your BA or do something else.
There's a some nice changes but I'm not sure how I feel about the reliance on Hunters mark. Depending how Beastmasters bonus action command works and if the rangers utility spells still need concentration and a bonus action to cast or not.
It's a BA to command the pet, but you can also replace one of your attacks to command it in a pinch instead. So on rounds where you need to move your HM, you can use that second option; you'll be down 1 attack, but provided you're not needing to move HM every round (or maybe even every other round?) you'll likely do more damage overall than if you didn't move HM. And if you do find yourself needing to move it every round, then whatever you're fighting is probably too weak for HM to matter anyway, and you should be saving your slots or concentrating on something else.
You should need to move it nearly every round for literally every fight except boss fights. Since almost all creatures do the same damage whether they are at full hp or 1 hp, a good party focuses on taking out one enemy at a time. Which in the great majority of cases means your target dies every round.
What this amounts to is a roundabout way to discourage good tactics. Shoot the guy other people aren't hitting so you can use your bonus action on the thing you want to do instead of moving your HM. Interactions like these make a class feel bad to play in a way that a bare feature list can't really communicate.
If they want to upgrade HM through class features, upgrade it. Allow it to jump to another enemy as a free action. Remove the concentration requirement. Give it additional effects rather than a pitiful damage upgrade. These kinds of things would actually make it cool and make people want to use it instead of complaining that they have to use it.
Look, I love Rangers. But their issue with action economy is the first thing I would have tackled on a redesign. Instead they've made it worse.
You should need to move it nearly every round for literally every fight except boss fights. Since almost all creatures do the same damage whether they are at full hp or 1 hp, a good party focuses on taking out one enemy at a time. Which in the great majority of cases means your target dies every round.
That's great in a whiteroom theorycraft scenario, but reality is different. Smart enemies can use cover, or become heavily obscured, or your priorities can change in battle etc. And if you're in any kind of difficult fight (especially a boss fight), your target dying in a single round likely means the DM did a pretty poor job planning the encounter.
If they want to upgrade HM through class features, upgrade it. Allow it to jump to another enemy as a free action. Remove the concentration requirement. Give it additional effects rather than a pitiful damage upgrade. These kinds of things would actually make it cool and make people want to use it instead of complaining that they have to use it.
So you want a 1d6 per hit ability, on a class that can make 4+ attacks without any investment, to also use no concentration and jump targets for free? So that they can then also combine it with Elemental Weapon, or Haste, or Conjure Minor Elementals, or Swift Quiver, or Spike Growth + Push, or Guardian of Nature? And you don't see any balance issues with that? None whatsoever?
as someone that went the Zephyr Strike route over Hunter's Mark, not a fan of these improvements. There's just so much focus on Hunter's Mark to get the most out of the class.
Good work on the subclasses (well Beast Master is still...i guess it's technically better), but base Ranger just has to wait way too long for abilities that are only slightly above average by that point.
As far as Zephyr's Strike is concerned, in my opinion, the problem there isn't Hunter's Mark, it's actually Zephyr's Strike. A spell that is basically gone in the round it is cast, requiring concentration? Who thought that was good design? Concentration spells should last across multiple rounds - spells that are finished in a round shouldn't have that descriptor.
Now, as far as the interaction between Hunter's Mark and other concentration spells are concerned, there's more of a case there, and possibly more game balance concerns as well. But interactions between Hunter's Mark and Zephyr's Strike only exist because the latter was given the concentration tag out of either ignorance or spite.
The old Favored Enemy can (and should, imo) just be replicated with skill checks and Expertise. I'm glad its gone.
I was wanting both over the reliance on hunter's mark. With the Tasha's version I took Deft explorer and favored enemy overwriting natural explorer from PHB for the much better deft explorer giving me expertise in a knowledge skill linked to my favored enemy while also giving me a language of my favored enemy + 2 more other languages. I much preferred that combination and it made me really feel like an expert in all things related to my favored enemies since I had expertise and advantage on all intelligence checks to recall and bring up information about them. I became a character that could exposition dump about specific enemies and then track them after a raid. I am definitely not against new expertise and the like as I used it with the deft explorer before, but I am just not a huge fan of the Hunter's mark as it feels like a do nothing feature in certain ranger builds, not all mind you. Ultimately what I want is the only capstone, and I prefer the old favored enemy over the free hunter's marks. Other than that its all good.
I really feel like this could've used another UA pass. So many features come online way too late. Imagine being a melee ranger for levels 1-12 with no way to protect your Hunter's Mark. Resilient Con or Warmaster are basically mandatory. Hunter's Mark also doesn't get any improvements from the core class until level 17, which is insane if it's supposed to be a major class mechanic.
STRanger also seems to have gotten little to no support again. Access to more fighting styles and Weapon Mastery is nice, but Hunter's Mark incentivizes the ranger to make as many attacks per round as possible. Not to mention that if you did take a feat for Heavy Armor you lose Roving, so you cannot fix your MADness.
Although that does somewhat depend on how Hunter's Mark functions with Cleave. Does the second attack roll count as a second attack for the purposes of triggering Hunter's Mark? In UA8 it refers to it as an extra attack at the end of the paragraph. That'd give STRangers three hits of Hunter's Mark a round to the dual wielder's four, but with a higher hit dice. It might make the Strength investment worthwhile if you bring a greataxe or halberd.
Edit: Wait, nevermind about Cleave. I forgot Hunter's Mark only effects one target at a time.
There's a some nice changes but I'm not sure how I feel about the reliance on Hunters mark. Depending how Beastmasters bonus action command works and if the rangers utility spells still need concentration and a bonus action to cast or not.
It's a BA to command the pet, but you can also replace one of your attacks to command it in a pinch instead. So on rounds where you need to move your HM, you can use that second option; you'll be down 1 attack, but provided you're not needing to move HM every round (or maybe even every other round?) you'll likely do more damage overall than if you didn't move HM. And if you do find yourself needing to move it every round, then whatever you're fighting is probably too weak for HM to matter anyway, and you should be saving your slots or concentrating on something else.
I might not need to move it every round, but I am going to have to constantly think about having to recast HM on difficult enemies because Im trying to use my combat spells too, like Entangling Shot and all the other bonus action spells Ranger has. It would feel so much more fun if i didnt have to constantly sacrifice HM because I wanted to do something other than attack.
The last time I played Ranger was Drakewarden and it felt incredibly bad not being able to attack with my drake companion because I had to try to juggle hunters mark, spells and commanding the drake every round, making me feel stupid and like I was making the wrong decision when things missed or didnt work out.
If Entangling shot, etc, doesnt use concentration anymore, then i feel everything is fine with these changes. Thankfully HM is free cast, but it still feels bad that my spells will break the concentration of HM:
With the number of abilities that scale with your WIS modifier in the new Ranger, building a WIS-focussed Ranger is worth considering. Pick up Shillelagh from Magic Initiate (Druid) or from Druidic Warrior, medium armour and shield (or be a Tortle) and maybe Starry Wisp for ranged attacks: sounds as though it might be viable.
I most dislike the Hunter being able to change their favored foe (Hunter's prey). I liked that the choice was permanent because that meant it was an important decision and part of your character's identity. What is the rp justification for switching it up all willy-nilly?
As far as the concentration requirement goes, I think we just don't want a character stacking Hex and Hunter's Mark.
What we aren't seeing is all the potential builds and how the new Ranger might stack up against other classes. A lot of the Ranger class/subclass traits can be partially gained through racial traits - Firbolg (MotM) hidden step pb times per day + Vex weapon mastery at lvl 1 vs invisibility at lvl 14; any great single-target damage stacking shenanigans a ranger might pull off with dual wielding + nick + Hunter's Mark vs a Fighter (that doesn't cap at 2 attacks) or Assassin (that could have sneak attack damage every round against every target). You can take the Hexblood lineage for a free casting of Hex per long rest plus the ability to cast it with spell slots vs the class feature to know Hunter's Mark and get free castings of it. The 15th level class feature of the Fey Wanderer is largely granted just by being an Eladrin. I wonder how the Battle Smith Artificer with its steel defender will compare to the Beastmaster Ranger. My point being that several of the Ranger class and subclass features don't seem unique and trend towards coming quite late.
I most dislike the Hunter being able to change their favored foe (Hunter's prey). I liked that the choice was permanent because that meant it was an important decision and part of your character's identity. What is the rp justification for switching it up all willy-nilly?
A deer hunter can still figure out how to shoot moose.
The biggest issue with a permanent choice is that, at level 1, you either have to guess right about the DM's' long range plans, or condemn the DM to running a genocidal campaign where all 'X' must die, because they are that ranger's sworn enemies.
I most dislike the Hunter being able to change their favored foe (Hunter's prey). I liked that the choice was permanent because that meant it was an important decision and part of your character's identity. What is the rp justification for switching it up all willy-nilly?
A deer hunter can still figure out how to shoot moose.
The biggest issue with a permanent choice is that, at level 1, you either have to guess right about the DM's' long range plans, or condemn the DM to running a genocidal campaign where all 'X' must die, because they are that ranger's sworn enemies.
But apparently one can't shoot a deer and a moose on the same day because...? Knowledge and expertise is permanent, and to treat it like a spell you prepare guts the feature imo.
If someone makes a wizard with a bunch of fire spells, it doesn't mean you never fight enemies with fire resistance - same thing with picking an enemy type, sometimes you benefit from the choice, sometimes you don't. It doesn't condemn anyone to anything anymore than being a cleric with turn undead does. Maybe clerics should get to change the enemy type they can turn, too?
I most dislike the Hunter being able to change their favored foe (Hunter's prey). I liked that the choice was permanent because that meant it was an important decision and part of your character's identity. What is the rp justification for switching it up all willy-nilly?
A deer hunter can still figure out how to shoot moose.
The biggest issue with a permanent choice is that, at level 1, you either have to guess right about the DM's' long range plans, or condemn the DM to running a genocidal campaign where all 'X' must die, because they are that ranger's sworn enemies.
But apparently one can't shoot a deer and a moose on the same day because...? Knowledge and expertise is permanent, and to treat it like a spell you prepare guts the feature imo.
If someone makes a wizard with a bunch of fire spells, it doesn't mean you never fight enemies with fire resistance - same thing with picking an enemy type, sometimes you benefit from the choice, sometimes you don't. It doesn't condemn anyone to anything anymore than being a cleric with turn undead does. Maybe clerics should get to change the enemy type they can turn, too?
Wizards can swap out their spells the next day and not deal with being permanently hampered by dealing with too much resistances, and clerics typically have a second option for channel divinity. Plus, Knowledge and expertise that isn't used can atrophy. But, pure game balance-wise, why should only some classes have features that force them to correctly guess what the DM is going to do for the entire rest of the campaign (or as I remember in the earlier days of the game, a Ranger choosing a species enemy could ensure that monster type was never seen again).
the fighting style changes are great tho some of those are a bad option if you want to use roving feral sense im not really sure changed just more like they are calling it blind sight now
I'm confused by your first sentence, they don't choose between Fighting Style and Roving, you get both.
Feral Sense is different because blindsight works while you're blind, whereas 2014 Feral Sense doesn't.
now lets point out the things you lose for not using a 1st lvl spell that uses your bonus action to cast and needs concentration (you do get free uses which is good for how much they are forcing it on you)
Favored Enemy always prepared + free castings instead of Favored Foe Favored Enemy concentration can't be broken by damage at mid-level Permanent advantage to Marked targets HM goes up to +d10 per hit
thank the gods this isnt tied to your class so you dont miss out on anything oh wait
At higher levels, most of the things you'd be concentrating on would be to get advantage anyway. Now that's built into HM, and damage can't break it. You have a guaranteed solid option for your concentration no matter what you're fighting, and it works whether you're melee or ranged.
And sure, it uses your bonus action to cast or move it, but then your bonus action is free after that. If only they had a way to get more attacks without using their bonus action like Nick Weapon Mastery oh wait.
(Oh and I forgot two more changes, they can use rituals and druidic focus now)
I like the changes but the focus, plus HM boost for Beastmaster can clog up moving HM and giving commands to your companion. Can’t look at UA version but will the beast keep attacking if you give the order once or do you have to keep using your BA? So, can you “Attack what I’m attacking(or hostile to me)” and they just do it until the combat is over?
I most dislike the Hunter being able to change their favored foe (Hunter's prey). I liked that the choice was permanent because that meant it was an important decision and part of your character's identity. What is the rp justification for switching it up all willy-nilly?
A deer hunter can still figure out how to shoot moose.
The biggest issue with a permanent choice is that, at level 1, you either have to guess right about the DM's' long range plans, or condemn the DM to running a genocidal campaign where all 'X' must die, because they are that ranger's sworn enemies.
But apparently one can't shoot a deer and a moose on the same day because...? Knowledge and expertise is permanent, and to treat it like a spell you prepare guts the feature imo.
If someone makes a wizard with a bunch of fire spells, it doesn't mean you never fight enemies with fire resistance - same thing with picking an enemy type, sometimes you benefit from the choice, sometimes you don't. It doesn't condemn anyone to anything anymore than being a cleric with turn undead does. Maybe clerics should get to change the enemy type they can turn, too?
They have the knowledge to hunt any target they set their mind on, but preparing for a specific target type needs extra prep.
That wizard can have non-fire spells in their book. They can prep what they choose to prep after any given long rest. But say it is a sorcerer or warlock without any such ability to change prepared spells. Their fire spells do still affect fire resistant creatures, regardless, but you are equating 'fire resistance,' a feature that only certain creatures have, with 'not that specific species,' a feature that everything except that specific species has.
That is a much greater restriction on the ranger. And if a PC specialized in fire based attacks, then the DM put nothing but fire resistant creatures against the party, they would quite rightly cry foul. This is not even apples and oranges, this is a specific kind of apple vs everything except that specific kind of apple.
A cleric's ability to turn undead is a specific type of use of their ability to Channel Divinity. They have other uses for that ability, for most subclasses, having nothing to do with undead and often far more effective than turning.
now lets point out the things you lose for not using a 1st lvl spell that uses your bonus action to cast and needs concentration (you do get free uses which is good for how much they are forcing it on you)
Favored Enemy always prepared + free castings instead of Favored Foe Favored Enemy concentration can't be broken by damage at mid-level Permanent advantage to Marked targets HM goes up to +d10 per hit
thank the gods this isnt tied to your class so you dont miss out on anything oh wait
At higher levels, most of the things you'd be concentrating on would be to get advantage anyway. Now that's built into HM, and damage can't break it. You have a guaranteed solid option for your concentration no matter what you're fighting, and it works whether you're melee or ranged.
And sure, it uses your bonus action to cast or move it, but then your bonus action is free after that. If only they had a way to get more attacks without using their bonus action like Nick Weapon Mastery oh wait.
(Oh and I forgot two more changes, they can use rituals and druidic focus now)
so damage cant break spell concentration but its still concentration??? why? whos out here scared of what the ranger might combo with hunters mark? its 1d6 of extra damage per attack so nice but not amazing when other spells do way more. the damage of the hunters mark doesnt go up until it hits 20th level? so the only thing the ranger gets at 20th level is for a 1st level spell that they still have a limited number of uses on and still needs concentration on? (there maybe something else on the capstone idk cant read it yet)
I think they did that because of how some subclasses like beast master build on it. You getting two attacks (3 with Nick weapon) and your beast with probably multiattack, and advantage later on HM targets could really build up.
Oh boy, I just saw how the comparison article highlights battleaxes as a strength ranger option, after they have taken care to gut strength rangers for some reason. What a massive shame this whole ordeal has been.
So they are expected to design a class around a proficiency that the class does not even have (heavy armor)? I get players who want to build STR characters that go against type (rogue, ranger, monk) but you can’t expect the designers to build around every possible choice a player may make. Sometimes “against type” characters have to make sacrifices.
the hunters mark change was lazy and honestly bad. you are free to use it if you want its dnd live your life i know you already preordered the book lol but yea im not wasting my money on the 2024 stuff
They do, but not until 13th level, which most people don’t get to.
There is warcaster, but I’d think resilient con would be the better choice, with no cantrip, they miss on some of the warcaster benefits, and depending on components of other spells, warcaster might not be a great choice.
It just seems like it would be poor design to have multiple class features based on a concentration spell without giving them a little boost to maintain it through the levels where most people will be playing. And, again, con seems more thematic than dex for this version. With stuff like tireless.
And that's fine, though I then question the objective of posting in every 2024 thread....
The ask was that they should get something to help with concentrating on it, and I was just pointing out that they did. Would I be upset if it were moved earlier, no - but it exists.
Yeah, Resilient Con is fine too. Either one boosts a secondary stat. Personally though I'd rather start with an evenn umber in Con.
The thing is though, you get multiple free uses of that spell and it scales even when you cast it without a spell slot. If they make you drop concentration on it - just cast it again, it's not like it's costing you any slots. It doesn't even interfere with your attacks.
If we couldn't have the concentration free version - which, let's face it, would have been utterly busted with all the attacks a Ranger can get - this is the next best thing.
was mainly waiting to see ranger but since this is the best they could muster ill just be kinda watching ig. "which, let's face it, would have been utterly busted with all the attacks a Ranger can get" isnt much damage compared to a wizards spells tbh but peace im out of here!
A wizard can't get that kind of damage out of a 1st-level slot. Level 1 HM lasts for an entire hour, you never need to upcast it, so getting a bunch for free will cover your entire day.
Oh, another buff to this Ranger from the UA that Treantmonk brought up - Nature's Veil now lasts till the end of your next turn rather than the start, and attacking still doesn't break it. So that's two rounds of concentration-free Quickened Greater Invisibility usable Wis times per day because you can activate it, move, full attack, then on your next turn, move, full attack again, and then either keep it going with your BA or do something else.
You should need to move it nearly every round for literally every fight except boss fights. Since almost all creatures do the same damage whether they are at full hp or 1 hp, a good party focuses on taking out one enemy at a time. Which in the great majority of cases means your target dies every round.
What this amounts to is a roundabout way to discourage good tactics. Shoot the guy other people aren't hitting so you can use your bonus action on the thing you want to do instead of moving your HM. Interactions like these make a class feel bad to play in a way that a bare feature list can't really communicate.
If they want to upgrade HM through class features, upgrade it. Allow it to jump to another enemy as a free action. Remove the concentration requirement. Give it additional effects rather than a pitiful damage upgrade. These kinds of things would actually make it cool and make people want to use it instead of complaining that they have to use it.
Look, I love Rangers. But their issue with action economy is the first thing I would have tackled on a redesign. Instead they've made it worse.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
That's great in a whiteroom theorycraft scenario, but reality is different. Smart enemies can use cover, or become heavily obscured, or your priorities can change in battle etc. And if you're in any kind of difficult fight (especially a boss fight), your target dying in a single round likely means the DM did a pretty poor job planning the encounter.
So you want a 1d6 per hit ability, on a class that can make 4+ attacks without any investment, to also use no concentration and jump targets for free? So that they can then also combine it with Elemental Weapon, or Haste, or Conjure Minor Elementals, or Swift Quiver, or Spike Growth + Push, or Guardian of Nature? And you don't see any balance issues with that? None whatsoever?
As far as Zephyr's Strike is concerned, in my opinion, the problem there isn't Hunter's Mark, it's actually Zephyr's Strike. A spell that is basically gone in the round it is cast, requiring concentration? Who thought that was good design? Concentration spells should last across multiple rounds - spells that are finished in a round shouldn't have that descriptor.
Now, as far as the interaction between Hunter's Mark and other concentration spells are concerned, there's more of a case there, and possibly more game balance concerns as well. But interactions between Hunter's Mark and Zephyr's Strike only exist because the latter was given the concentration tag out of either ignorance or spite.
I was wanting both over the reliance on hunter's mark. With the Tasha's version I took Deft explorer and favored enemy overwriting natural explorer from PHB for the much better deft explorer giving me expertise in a knowledge skill linked to my favored enemy while also giving me a language of my favored enemy + 2 more other languages. I much preferred that combination and it made me really feel like an expert in all things related to my favored enemies since I had expertise and advantage on all intelligence checks to recall and bring up information about them. I became a character that could exposition dump about specific enemies and then track them after a raid. I am definitely not against new expertise and the like as I used it with the deft explorer before, but I am just not a huge fan of the Hunter's mark as it feels like a do nothing feature in certain ranger builds, not all mind you. Ultimately what I want is the only capstone, and I prefer the old favored enemy over the free hunter's marks. Other than that its all good.
I really feel like this could've used another UA pass. So many features come online way too late. Imagine being a melee ranger for levels 1-12 with no way to protect your Hunter's Mark. Resilient Con or Warmaster are basically mandatory. Hunter's Mark also doesn't get any improvements from the core class until level 17, which is insane if it's supposed to be a major class mechanic.
STRanger also seems to have gotten little to no support again. Access to more fighting styles and Weapon Mastery is nice, but Hunter's Mark incentivizes the ranger to make as many attacks per round as possible. Not to mention that if you did take a feat for Heavy Armor you lose Roving, so you cannot fix your MADness.
Although that does somewhat depend on how Hunter's Mark functions with Cleave. Does the second attack roll count as a second attack for the purposes of triggering Hunter's Mark? In UA8 it refers to it as an extra attack at the end of the paragraph. That'd give STRangers three hits of Hunter's Mark a round to the dual wielder's four, but with a higher hit dice. It might make the Strength investment worthwhile if you bring a greataxe or halberd.Edit: Wait, nevermind about Cleave. I forgot Hunter's Mark only effects one target at a time.
I might not need to move it every round, but I am going to have to constantly think about having to recast HM on difficult enemies because Im trying to use my combat spells too, like Entangling Shot and all the other bonus action spells Ranger has. It would feel so much more fun if i didnt have to constantly sacrifice HM because I wanted to do something other than attack.
The last time I played Ranger was Drakewarden and it felt incredibly bad not being able to attack with my drake companion because I had to try to juggle hunters mark, spells and commanding the drake every round, making me feel stupid and like I was making the wrong decision when things missed or didnt work out.
If Entangling shot, etc, doesnt use concentration anymore, then i feel everything is fine with these changes. Thankfully HM is free cast, but it still feels bad that my spells will break the concentration of HM:
With the number of abilities that scale with your WIS modifier in the new Ranger, building a WIS-focussed Ranger is worth considering. Pick up Shillelagh from Magic Initiate (Druid) or from Druidic Warrior, medium armour and shield (or be a Tortle) and maybe Starry Wisp for ranged attacks: sounds as though it might be viable.
I most dislike the Hunter being able to change their favored foe (Hunter's prey). I liked that the choice was permanent because that meant it was an important decision and part of your character's identity. What is the rp justification for switching it up all willy-nilly?
As far as the concentration requirement goes, I think we just don't want a character stacking Hex and Hunter's Mark.
What we aren't seeing is all the potential builds and how the new Ranger might stack up against other classes. A lot of the Ranger class/subclass traits can be partially gained through racial traits - Firbolg (MotM) hidden step pb times per day + Vex weapon mastery at lvl 1 vs invisibility at lvl 14; any great single-target damage stacking shenanigans a ranger might pull off with dual wielding + nick + Hunter's Mark vs a Fighter (that doesn't cap at 2 attacks) or Assassin (that could have sneak attack damage every round against every target). You can take the Hexblood lineage for a free casting of Hex per long rest plus the ability to cast it with spell slots vs the class feature to know Hunter's Mark and get free castings of it. The 15th level class feature of the Fey Wanderer is largely granted just by being an Eladrin. I wonder how the Battle Smith Artificer with its steel defender will compare to the Beastmaster Ranger. My point being that several of the Ranger class and subclass features don't seem unique and trend towards coming quite late.
A deer hunter can still figure out how to shoot moose.
The biggest issue with a permanent choice is that, at level 1, you either have to guess right about the DM's' long range plans, or condemn the DM to running a genocidal campaign where all 'X' must die, because they are that ranger's sworn enemies.
But apparently one can't shoot a deer and a moose on the same day because...? Knowledge and expertise is permanent, and to treat it like a spell you prepare guts the feature imo.
If someone makes a wizard with a bunch of fire spells, it doesn't mean you never fight enemies with fire resistance - same thing with picking an enemy type, sometimes you benefit from the choice, sometimes you don't. It doesn't condemn anyone to anything anymore than being a cleric with turn undead does. Maybe clerics should get to change the enemy type they can turn, too?
Wizards can swap out their spells the next day and not deal with being permanently hampered by dealing with too much resistances, and clerics typically have a second option for channel divinity. Plus, Knowledge and expertise that isn't used can atrophy. But, pure game balance-wise, why should only some classes have features that force them to correctly guess what the DM is going to do for the entire rest of the campaign (or as I remember in the earlier days of the game, a Ranger choosing a species enemy could ensure that monster type was never seen again).
I like the changes but the focus, plus HM boost for Beastmaster can clog up moving HM and giving commands to your companion. Can’t look at UA version but will the beast keep attacking if you give the order once or do you have to keep using your BA? So, can you “Attack what I’m attacking(or hostile to me)” and they just do it until the combat is over?
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
They have the knowledge to hunt any target they set their mind on, but preparing for a specific target type needs extra prep.
That wizard can have non-fire spells in their book. They can prep what they choose to prep after any given long rest. But say it is a sorcerer or warlock without any such ability to change prepared spells. Their fire spells do still affect fire resistant creatures, regardless, but you are equating 'fire resistance,' a feature that only certain creatures have, with 'not that specific species,' a feature that everything except that specific species has.
That is a much greater restriction on the ranger. And if a PC specialized in fire based attacks, then the DM put nothing but fire resistant creatures against the party, they would quite rightly cry foul. This is not even apples and oranges, this is a specific kind of apple vs everything except that specific kind of apple.
A cleric's ability to turn undead is a specific type of use of their ability to Channel Divinity. They have other uses for that ability, for most subclasses, having nothing to do with undead and often far more effective than turning.
I think they did that because of how some subclasses like beast master build on it. You getting two attacks (3 with Nick weapon) and your beast with probably multiattack, and advantage later on HM targets could really build up.
I would have been fine with no concentration.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
So they are expected to design a class around a proficiency that the class does not even have (heavy armor)? I get players who want to build STR characters that go against type (rogue, ranger, monk) but you can’t expect the designers to build around every possible choice a player may make. Sometimes “against type” characters have to make sacrifices.
I’m fine with how it is
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?