Mechanically, I understand the benefits of changing enemy types. But I'm having trouble imagining how to RP that.
As I suggested, either it is preparing one's gear specifically for that kind of prey or it is literally attuning yourself to that prey (in a lesser, non-spell version of Hunter's Mark)
Mechanically, I understand the benefits of changing enemy types. But I'm having trouble imagining how to RP that.
As I suggested, either it is preparing one's gear specifically for that kind of prey or it is literally attuning yourself to that prey (in a lesser, non-spell version of Hunter's Mark)
If it's inventory, why can't anyone get it? Otherwise, it's "ranger magic" instead of their expertise.
Mechanically, I understand the benefits of changing enemy types. But I'm having trouble imagining how to RP that.
As I suggested, either it is preparing one's gear specifically for that kind of prey or it is literally attuning yourself to that prey (in a lesser, non-spell version of Hunter's Mark)
If it's inventory, why can't anyone get it? Otherwise, it's "ranger magic" instead of their expertise.
Why wasn't the old version available to everyone? Why does one have to be a ranger to have an ancestral enemy or to train against one specific species? Why couldn't the ranger train everyone in the same way they learned the 2014 version?
Why can't everyone simply learn any given spell? Why can't everyone simply 'learn' every skill and armor and weapon proficiency (without feats?)
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.
If it drops, just recast it and keep attacking. That's why they give you a bunch of free uses right at level 1; we don't even need to burn a preparation on it anymore.
STRanger also seems to have gotten little to no support again.
They don't have to support every playstyle. Stronk and Dexbarian have little to no support either, because they're not the intended way to play those classes.
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:
The intention is that you'll have tradeoffs between Mark and other concentration spells; that creates tactical depth.
I'm not opposed to the idea of HM no longer requiring concentration eventually - but that should be a very high level modification, if not the capstone of the class, because it'd be a huge boost to the Ranger's power.
Regarding Drakewarden, I agree, they should have the same ability BM has to command their pet with one of their attacks on turns where they need their BA for something else.
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?
As I mentioned previously, BM can give up one of its attacks to command the pet when they need their BA for something else, just like the Tasha's version.
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.
I don't cast Zephyr Strike for the damage, I cast it for the immunity to opportunity attacks. It's excellent for that and it enables me to use tactics that keep me from being attacked, and thus hit. When I stop needing that, I drop it.
If you want to give me the speed boost on all my turns I wouldn't say no :-) but really it's a very effective spell in synergy with the rest of my party, letting me get pretty anywhere I want to be on the battlemap and then back OUT OF THERE before anyone can attack.
I can use it to position myself to get advantage for multiple attacks. The extra damage die is just a nice bow on top.
I love playing Ranger in 5e. It will be interesting to see how this plays differently. I've found so many times that what I see on paper plays out quite differently than I expect when mixing with my party and whatever the DM throws at us.
I'm glad to have spellcasting at level 1, that always was a little odd to have to learn it at level 2. But not really the biggest change since most of us don't spend a lot of time at level 1.
One thing is, that my resource limitation as a Ranger has never been spell slots, but rather concentration. I don't use Hunter's Mark a lot because it precludes the use of any other (combat useful) spell on my list. Having to use the bonus action to move it competes with two weapon fighting or commanding a pet. Sometimes mathematically Hunter's Mark with one less attack is better, especially when fighting one tough enemy instead of a lot of small enemies, or if I'm using the longbow, and that's when I use it. But it's not my go-to.
I use Zephyr Strike quite a bit to position myself and get to the toughest or protected enemies while staying out of reach of the worst on the battlefield.
I suppose having Hunter's Mark not take a spell slot means that it's easier/more advantageous to raise it and then drop it to cast other spells, to swap concentration around during the fight, so I might indeed use it more in this ruleset. As I play now, I often only cast one spell per combat because I am quite good at not losing concentration, and I am mindful of using spell slots sparingly. I probably should drop and recast more often now that I have more slots. It's just... you never know how many combats there will be today, right?
I am very interested in being able to swap spells after a long rest. But mainly, having some combat spell options that don't take concentration would give the class a lot more versatility. Maybe they'd think too much but well, one does like to be greedy. ;-)
Nothing about group stealth? I mean, a ranger should be able to help the roistering dwarf paladin in his loud shyny armor to keep quite. Maybe in the class or a subclass it should be allowed to give an advantage to stealth to some group mates.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vifarc Cordelibre, the most unique ranger-tank, the wood-elf heavy-ranger.
Having to use the bonus action to move it competes with two weapon fighting or commanding a pet.
Actually this isn't true - if you use a Nick weapon then you can TWF and still leave your bonus action free. And the BM pet can be commanded as part of your Attack action by giving up one of your attacks, resulting in a small DPR hit, but likely smaller than if your pet did nothing that round.
I am very interested in being able to swap spells after a long rest. But mainly, having some combat spell options that don't take concentration would give the class a lot more versatility. Maybe they'd think too much but well, one does like to be greedy. ;-)
There are plenty of great ranger spells that don't require concentration - like Absorb Elements, the new Jump, Goodberry between fights, Steel Wind Strike etc. And we know they're getting even more.
Nothing about group stealth? I mean, a ranger should be able to help the roistering dwarf paladin in his loud shyny armor to keep quite. Maybe in the class or a subclass it should be allowed to give an advantage to stealth to some group mates.
Mechanically, I understand the benefits of changing enemy types. But I'm having trouble imagining how to RP that.
As I suggested, either it is preparing one's gear specifically for that kind of prey or it is literally attuning yourself to that prey (in a lesser, non-spell version of Hunter's Mark)
If it's inventory, why can't anyone get it? Otherwise, it's "ranger magic" instead of their expertise.
Having a piece of equipment doesn’t mean you can use it to its full effect. I own a saw and can cut a board with it but that doesn’t make me a carpenter.
Favored Enemy concentration can't be broken by damage at mid-levels
Deft Explorer gives up to 3x Expertise (alongside the 2 more languages.)
Spell list increased to have more utility and offense
Permanent advantage to Marked targets
Feral senses grant 30ft blindsight (i.e. it still works even if you're blinded unlike 2014)
HM goes up to +d10 per hit
Your posts have made a dent in my depression regarding the ranger reaction. People just don't understand what the ranger is supposed to be. It's supposed to be a divine jack of all trades focused on martial weapons and exploration. It's SUPPOSED to be good but not great at everything except exploration, where they are great with the added Expertise alone. Besides, JC literally can't consider Tasha "mechanical canon" because all those rules are OPTIONAL, a DM who follows the rules to the letter can justifiably ban them in their games, now they can't if they want to play the 2024 version (I mean sure, they can, but others can then homebrew the ranger any way they want so it doesn't matter).
I think it’s a very good point about people not understanding what a Ranger is meant to be. Most of these arguments revolve around nothing but combat and in that case the class comes up short against several other classes. But exploration is one of the three pillars of the game and it seems to me that this new Ranger has been designed for that, as you say a Jack of all trades with that as its focus. Giving it both a climb speed and a swim speed helps with that a lot, as do getting a few expertises, and in that pillar of the game it has very little competition
Out of interest, does wearing heavy armour shut down Roving completely or just the extra 10’ movement? The wording in the article is ambiguous to me.
I think the restriction makes sense, as it’s in line with same restriction on the Barbarian’s Fast Movement feature. Also, I don’t personally picture Rangers in full plate armour.
I think it’s a very good point about people not understanding what a Ranger is meant to be. Most of these arguments revolve around nothing but combat and in that case the class comes up short against several other classes. But exploration is one of the three pillars of the game and it seems to me that this new Ranger has been designed for that, as you say a Jack of all trades with that as its focus. Giving it both a climb speed and a swim speed helps with that a lot, as do getting a few expertises, and in that pillar of the game it has very little competition.
And let's not forget the spells! Pass Without Trace, Goodberry, Detect Magic, Locate Object/Creature, Speak with Animals/Plants, Air Bubble, Alarm... there's so much they can do to crush exploration challenges, and they can also participate in social challenges that few other characters can. When you're the one who convinces a squirrel to spy on a camp of enemy raiders and report back, your entire party is going to remember that moment in the campaign.
As someone who almost exclusively played Rangers for the last two years (although I never made it past level 6 for any of them), these changes fix the a lot of problems I had with them.
Spellcasting at level 1 is nice, wasn't ever really an issue for me before as it initially allowed me to ease into a character as a beginner before adding the spellcasting mechanic that I had to then learn at the time. But switching out one prepared spell per day would have been a game changer, since previously I had to wait months before replacing situational spells that I had picked but never really used. New Favored Enemy (Hunter's Mark always prepared) is basically an upgraded Tasha's Favored Foe, nice I'll take that. I took that Tasha's optional over the old Favored Enemy (I found it way too situational, and didn't miss out on much since I could always just roll for skill checks) but never ended up using the replacement anyway unless I was out of spell slots for actual Hunter's Mark at 6th level. Hunter's Mark competing with other concentration spells meant I always relied on it primarily (with hand crossbows and Crossbow Expert feat) so leaning into it even more wouldn't have been an issue for me. New Weapon Mastery that I can swap out alongside spells, also a nice addition.
Natural explorer removed is fine by me, it was way too situational so again I would pick Tasha's Deft Explorer as the optional replacement. New Deft Explorer kicks in at level 2 anyway. Removing Primeval Awareness is again not an issue for me, it was another feature I found useless and the new features with expanded spell list pretty much covers the Tasha's Primal Awareness replacement. Extra 5ft movement for Roving is welcome, and I never used heavy armor for my Rangers (DEX based) so that wouldn't have bothered me.
Beyond that, I can't say much more but the consensus seems to be that a +2 average damage as a capstone feature that still requires concentration is disappointing.
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:
The intention is that you'll have tradeoffs between Mark and other concentration spells; that creates tactical depth.
I'm not opposed to the idea of HM no longer requiring concentration eventually - but that should be a very high level modification, if not the capstone of the class, because it'd be a huge boost to the Ranger's power.
Regarding Drakewarden, I agree, they should have the same ability BM has to command their pet with one of their attacks on turns where they need their BA for something else.
I'd rather have Entangling shot not have concentration and just miss if i miss all my shots that turn than have them break HM. Otherwise I feel like a lot of players will feel like they have no other choice other than keeping HM up since there are so many features focusing on HM, if you get what I mean? Like, the heavy focus on HM will makde it so bad players will be mean to Ranger players who wants to "break the meta". I cant say what the meta will be and am just speculating, but it has this bad gut feeling with me right now.
The intention is that you'll have tradeoffs between Mark and other concentration spells; that creates tactical depth.
I'm not opposed to the idea of HM no longer requiring concentration eventually - but that should be a very high level modification, if not the capstone of the class, because it'd be a huge boost to the Ranger's power.
Regarding Drakewarden, I agree, they should have the same ability BM has to command their pet with one of their attacks on turns where they need their BA for something else.
I'd rather have Entangling shot not have concentration and just miss if i miss all my shots that turn than have them break HM. Otherwise I feel like a lot of players will feel like they have no other choice other than keeping HM up since there are so many features focusing on HM, if you get what I mean? Like, the heavy focus on HM will makde it so bad players will be mean to Ranger players who wants to "break the meta". I cant say what the meta will be and am just speculating, but it has this bad gut feeling with me right now.
I get what you mean, I definitely felt the same way during my previous campaign. Control spells like Ensnaring Strike or Entangle or Spike Growth weren't used as much as I would've liked to because most times I could get more mileage per cast with Hunter's Mark and focus attacks on one target then moving it to the next. The strategy did feel repetitive after while so having it no longer require concentration, either after a certain level or even if only when free casting as Favored Enemy without expending a spell slot (freeing up the spell slot to cast the other spells) would have been an easier fix than changing multiple concentration spells to no longer require it.
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
STRanger shouldn't be considered "against type". The most iconic ranger in fiction is Aragorn, and he wielded a longsword. The most popular ranger-esque characters of more modern literature both use swords too, Jon Snow and Geralt of Rivia.
Heck, ranger has proficiency in both DEX and STR saving throws.
I think a new version of a class not supporting a popular playstyle, or, in this case, actively discouraging it more than before, is a fair criticism to bring up when discussing how a class has been changed.
As someone who almost exclusively played Rangers for the last two years (although I never made it past level 6 for any of them), these changes fix the a lot of problems I had with them.
Spellcasting at level 1 is nice, wasn't ever really an issue for me before as it initially allowed me to ease into a character as a beginner before adding the spellcasting mechanic that I had to then learn at the time. But switching out one prepared spell per day would have been a game changer, since previously I had to wait months before replacing situational spells that I had picked but never really used. New Favored Enemy (Hunter's Mark always prepared) is basically an upgraded Tasha's Favored Foe, nice I'll take that. I took that Tasha's optional over the old Favored Enemy (I found it way too situational, and didn't miss out on much since I could always just roll for skill checks) but never ended up using the replacement anyway unless I was out of spell slots for actual Hunter's Mark at 6th level. Hunter's Mark competing with other concentration spells meant I always relied on it primarily (with hand crossbows and Crossbow Expert feat) so leaning into it even more wouldn't have been an issue for me. New Weapon Mastery that I can swap out alongside spells, also a nice addition.
Natural explorer removed is fine by me, it was way too situational so again I would pick Tasha's Deft Explorer as the optional replacement. New Deft Explorer kicks in at level 2 anyway. Removing Primeval Awareness is again not an issue for me, it was another feature I found useless and the new features with expanded spell list pretty much covers the Tasha's Primal Awareness replacement. Extra 5ft movement for Roving is welcome, and I never used heavy armor for my Rangers (DEX based) so that wouldn't have bothered me.
Beyond that, I can't say much more but the consensus seems to be that a +2 average damage as a capstone feature that still requires concentration is disappointing.
I played a Fey Wanderer for several levels, but rotated the character out due to bad dice luck. I was mostly happy with the character (and was using a sword/shield build), but literally every single time I had to make a perception check to spot an ambush the d20 would do a d4 impression. A scout who can't spot any danger is most certainly NOT the fantasy I had when I made the character.
*No, I'm not misusing the word "literally" here - the character did not make a single perception check to avoid being ambushed before I rotated the character out.
As someone who almost exclusively played Rangers for the last two years (although I never made it past level 6 for any of them), these changes fix the a lot of problems I had with them.
Spellcasting at level 1 is nice, wasn't ever really an issue for me before as it initially allowed me to ease into a character as a beginner before adding the spellcasting mechanic that I had to then learn at the time. But switching out one prepared spell per day would have been a game changer, since previously I had to wait months before replacing situational spells that I had picked but never really used. New Favored Enemy (Hunter's Mark always prepared) is basically an upgraded Tasha's Favored Foe, nice I'll take that. I took that Tasha's optional over the old Favored Enemy (I found it way too situational, and didn't miss out on much since I could always just roll for skill checks) but never ended up using the replacement anyway unless I was out of spell slots for actual Hunter's Mark at 6th level. Hunter's Mark competing with other concentration spells meant I always relied on it primarily (with hand crossbows and Crossbow Expert feat) so leaning into it even more wouldn't have been an issue for me. New Weapon Mastery that I can swap out alongside spells, also a nice addition.
Natural explorer removed is fine by me, it was way too situational so again I would pick Tasha's Deft Explorer as the optional replacement. New Deft Explorer kicks in at level 2 anyway. Removing Primeval Awareness is again not an issue for me, it was another feature I found useless and the new features with expanded spell list pretty much covers the Tasha's Primal Awareness replacement. Extra 5ft movement for Roving is welcome, and I never used heavy armor for my Rangers (DEX based) so that wouldn't have bothered me.
Beyond that, I can't say much more but the consensus seems to be that a +2 average damage as a capstone feature that still requires concentration is disappointing.
I played a Fey Wanderer for several levels, but rotated the character out due to bad dice luck. I was mostly happy with the character (and was using a sword/shield build), but literally every single time I had to make a perception check to spot an ambush the d20 would do a d4 impression. A scout who can't spot any danger is most certainly NOT the fantasy I had when I made the character.
*No, I'm not misusing the word "literally" here - the character did not make a single perception check to avoid being ambushed before I rotated the character out.
That kind of thing is one of the reasons passives exist. You might miss noticing any given statement in an overheard conversation but missing the fact there is a conversation is another matter. If you just keep casually advancing without paying attention to likely ambush points, then that would be an active check problem, but if you are looking out for points that would be particularly good ambush spots, and approach those only slowly and carefully (so your passives have a chance to matter), then you are hedging your bets.
Does not work well if the party is on a deadline to get somewhere, or if the DM really has their heart set on ambushing the party (sadly, there are DM's like that), but worth at least asking your DM about, as to their opinion on it.
In general, I consider the Tasha's options improvements and allow them as a DM. Sounds like the new rules seem to have mostly adopted them...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Mechanically, I understand the benefits of changing enemy types. But I'm having trouble imagining how to RP that.
As I suggested, either it is preparing one's gear specifically for that kind of prey or it is literally attuning yourself to that prey (in a lesser, non-spell version of Hunter's Mark)
If it's inventory, why can't anyone get it? Otherwise, it's "ranger magic" instead of their expertise.
Why wasn't the old version available to everyone? Why does one have to be a ranger to have an ancestral enemy or to train against one specific species? Why couldn't the ranger train everyone in the same way they learned the 2014 version?
Why can't everyone simply learn any given spell? Why can't everyone simply 'learn' every skill and armor and weapon proficiency (without feats?)
Some things are because they are.
If it drops, just recast it and keep attacking. That's why they give you a bunch of free uses right at level 1; we don't even need to burn a preparation on it anymore.
They don't have to support every playstyle. Stronk and Dexbarian have little to no support either, because they're not the intended way to play those classes.
The intention is that you'll have tradeoffs between Mark and other concentration spells; that creates tactical depth.
I'm not opposed to the idea of HM no longer requiring concentration eventually - but that should be a very high level modification, if not the capstone of the class, because it'd be a huge boost to the Ranger's power.
Regarding Drakewarden, I agree, they should have the same ability BM has to command their pet with one of their attacks on turns where they need their BA for something else.
As I mentioned previously, BM can give up one of its attacks to command the pet when they need their BA for something else, just like the Tasha's version.
I don't cast Zephyr Strike for the damage, I cast it for the immunity to opportunity attacks. It's excellent for that and it enables me to use tactics that keep me from being attacked, and thus hit. When I stop needing that, I drop it.
If you want to give me the speed boost on all my turns I wouldn't say no :-) but really it's a very effective spell in synergy with the rest of my party, letting me get pretty anywhere I want to be on the battlemap and then back OUT OF THERE before anyone can attack.
I can use it to position myself to get advantage for multiple attacks. The extra damage die is just a nice bow on top.
I love playing Ranger in 5e. It will be interesting to see how this plays differently. I've found so many times that what I see on paper plays out quite differently than I expect when mixing with my party and whatever the DM throws at us.
I'm glad to have spellcasting at level 1, that always was a little odd to have to learn it at level 2. But not really the biggest change since most of us don't spend a lot of time at level 1.
One thing is, that my resource limitation as a Ranger has never been spell slots, but rather concentration. I don't use Hunter's Mark a lot because it precludes the use of any other (combat useful) spell on my list. Having to use the bonus action to move it competes with two weapon fighting or commanding a pet. Sometimes mathematically Hunter's Mark with one less attack is better, especially when fighting one tough enemy instead of a lot of small enemies, or if I'm using the longbow, and that's when I use it. But it's not my go-to.
I use Zephyr Strike quite a bit to position myself and get to the toughest or protected enemies while staying out of reach of the worst on the battlefield.
I suppose having Hunter's Mark not take a spell slot means that it's easier/more advantageous to raise it and then drop it to cast other spells, to swap concentration around during the fight, so I might indeed use it more in this ruleset. As I play now, I often only cast one spell per combat because I am quite good at not losing concentration, and I am mindful of using spell slots sparingly. I probably should drop and recast more often now that I have more slots. It's just... you never know how many combats there will be today, right?
I am very interested in being able to swap spells after a long rest. But mainly, having some combat spell options that don't take concentration would give the class a lot more versatility. Maybe they'd think too much but well, one does like to be greedy. ;-)
Nothing about group stealth?
I mean, a ranger should be able to help the roistering dwarf paladin in his loud shyny armor to keep quite.
Maybe in the class or a subclass it should be allowed to give an advantage to stealth to some group mates.
Vifarc Cordelibre, the most unique ranger-tank, the wood-elf heavy-ranger.
Actually this isn't true - if you use a Nick weapon then you can TWF and still leave your bonus action free. And the BM pet can be commanded as part of your Attack action by giving up one of your attacks, resulting in a small DPR hit, but likely smaller than if your pet did nothing that round.
There are plenty of great ranger spells that don't require concentration - like Absorb Elements, the new Jump, Goodberry between fights, Steel Wind Strike etc. And we know they're getting even more.
There's a Ranger spell for that 😛
I was originally hoping it would get toned down - but the Surprise changes might actually make that unnecessary.
Having a piece of equipment doesn’t mean you can use it to its full effect. I own a saw and can cut a board with it but that doesn’t make me a carpenter.
Imo this reboot of Ranger just beats crap out of 2014
I think it’s a very good point about people not understanding what a Ranger is meant to be. Most of these arguments revolve around nothing but combat and in that case the class comes up short against several other classes. But exploration is one of the three pillars of the game and it seems to me that this new Ranger has been designed for that, as you say a Jack of all trades with that as its focus. Giving it both a climb speed and a swim speed helps with that a lot, as do getting a few expertises, and in that pillar of the game it has very little competition
Out of interest, does wearing heavy armour shut down Roving completely or just the extra 10’ movement? The wording in the article is ambiguous to me.
I think the restriction makes sense, as it’s in line with same restriction on the Barbarian’s Fast Movement feature. Also, I don’t personally picture Rangers in full plate armour.
And let's not forget the spells! Pass Without Trace, Goodberry, Detect Magic, Locate Object/Creature, Speak with Animals/Plants, Air Bubble, Alarm... there's so much they can do to crush exploration challenges, and they can also participate in social challenges that few other characters can. When you're the one who convinces a squirrel to spy on a camp of enemy raiders and report back, your entire party is going to remember that moment in the campaign.
As someone who almost exclusively played Rangers for the last two years (although I never made it past level 6 for any of them), these changes fix the a lot of problems I had with them.
Spellcasting at level 1 is nice, wasn't ever really an issue for me before as it initially allowed me to ease into a character as a beginner before adding the spellcasting mechanic that I had to then learn at the time. But switching out one prepared spell per day would have been a game changer, since previously I had to wait months before replacing situational spells that I had picked but never really used. New Favored Enemy (Hunter's Mark always prepared) is basically an upgraded Tasha's Favored Foe, nice I'll take that. I took that Tasha's optional over the old Favored Enemy (I found it way too situational, and didn't miss out on much since I could always just roll for skill checks) but never ended up using the replacement anyway unless I was out of spell slots for actual Hunter's Mark at 6th level. Hunter's Mark competing with other concentration spells meant I always relied on it primarily (with hand crossbows and Crossbow Expert feat) so leaning into it even more wouldn't have been an issue for me. New Weapon Mastery that I can swap out alongside spells, also a nice addition.
Natural explorer removed is fine by me, it was way too situational so again I would pick Tasha's Deft Explorer as the optional replacement. New Deft Explorer kicks in at level 2 anyway. Removing Primeval Awareness is again not an issue for me, it was another feature I found useless and the new features with expanded spell list pretty much covers the Tasha's Primal Awareness replacement. Extra 5ft movement for Roving is welcome, and I never used heavy armor for my Rangers (DEX based) so that wouldn't have bothered me.
Beyond that, I can't say much more but the consensus seems to be that a +2 average damage as a capstone feature that still requires concentration is disappointing.
Free Content: [Basic Rules],
[Phandelver],[Frozen Sick],[Acquisitions Inc.],[Vecna Dossier],[Radiant Citadel], [Spelljammer],[Dragonlance], [Prisoner 13],[Minecraft],[Star Forge], [Baldur’s Gate], [Lightning Keep], [Stormwreck Isle], [Pinebrook], [Caverns of Tsojcanth], [The Lost Horn], [Elemental Evil].Free Dice: [Frostmaiden],
[Flourishing], [Sanguine],[Themberchaud], [Baldur's Gate 3], [Lego].I'd rather have Entangling shot not have concentration and just miss if i miss all my shots that turn than have them break HM. Otherwise I feel like a lot of players will feel like they have no other choice other than keeping HM up since there are so many features focusing on HM, if you get what I mean? Like, the heavy focus on HM will makde it so bad players will be mean to Ranger players who wants to "break the meta". I cant say what the meta will be and am just speculating, but it has this bad gut feeling with me right now.
I get what you mean, I definitely felt the same way during my previous campaign. Control spells like Ensnaring Strike or Entangle or Spike Growth weren't used as much as I would've liked to because most times I could get more mileage per cast with Hunter's Mark and focus attacks on one target then moving it to the next. The strategy did feel repetitive after while so having it no longer require concentration, either after a certain level or even if only when free casting as Favored Enemy without expending a spell slot (freeing up the spell slot to cast the other spells) would have been an easier fix than changing multiple concentration spells to no longer require it.
Free Content: [Basic Rules],
[Phandelver],[Frozen Sick],[Acquisitions Inc.],[Vecna Dossier],[Radiant Citadel], [Spelljammer],[Dragonlance], [Prisoner 13],[Minecraft],[Star Forge], [Baldur’s Gate], [Lightning Keep], [Stormwreck Isle], [Pinebrook], [Caverns of Tsojcanth], [The Lost Horn], [Elemental Evil].Free Dice: [Frostmaiden],
[Flourishing], [Sanguine],[Themberchaud], [Baldur's Gate 3], [Lego].STRanger shouldn't be considered "against type". The most iconic ranger in fiction is Aragorn, and he wielded a longsword. The most popular ranger-esque characters of more modern literature both use swords too, Jon Snow and Geralt of Rivia.
Heck, ranger has proficiency in both DEX and STR saving throws.
I think a new version of a class not supporting a popular playstyle, or, in this case, actively discouraging it more than before, is a fair criticism to bring up when discussing how a class has been changed.
I played a Fey Wanderer for several levels, but rotated the character out due to bad dice luck. I was mostly happy with the character (and was using a sword/shield build), but literally every single time I had to make a perception check to spot an ambush the d20 would do a d4 impression. A scout who can't spot any danger is most certainly NOT the fantasy I had when I made the character.
*No, I'm not misusing the word "literally" here - the character did not make a single perception check to avoid being ambushed before I rotated the character out.
That kind of thing is one of the reasons passives exist. You might miss noticing any given statement in an overheard conversation but missing the fact there is a conversation is another matter. If you just keep casually advancing without paying attention to likely ambush points, then that would be an active check problem, but if you are looking out for points that would be particularly good ambush spots, and approach those only slowly and carefully (so your passives have a chance to matter), then you are hedging your bets.
Does not work well if the party is on a deadline to get somewhere, or if the DM really has their heart set on ambushing the party (sadly, there are DM's like that), but worth at least asking your DM about, as to their opinion on it.
In general, I consider the Tasha's options improvements and allow them as a DM. Sounds like the new rules seem to have mostly adopted them...