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.
And how often was Aragorn in full plate armor? The argument I was seeing in this thread is that STRangers were nerfed because a feature didn’t allow heavy armor. Isn’t that feature called Roving? Or something like that? I don’t have a chance to look right now. So it fits narratively that a feature named such doesn’t fit a heavily armor clad character. That’s what I was referring to.
You can still play your longsword wielding Ranger just like you could with 2014 Ranger who also didn’t have heavy armor proficiency. Nothing is stopping you. Just one feature may suffer for it.
the common problem i see people talk about for the new ranger is linked to one thing hunters mark the spell uses your con and is a BA to cast for just 1d6 on an attack.
some simple ways to fix it is at later levels allow it to be cast on a hit instead of a BA (like smite) and make it lose con (prob around 13th level) so it really feels like the rangers spell because they are the only ones who can use it like that.
the common problem i see people talk about for the new ranger is linked to one thing hunters mark the spell uses your con and is a BA to cast for just 1d6 on an attack.
some simple ways to fix it is at later levels allow it to be cast on a hit instead of a BA (like smite) and make it lose con (prob around 13th level) so it really feels like the rangers spell because they are the only ones who can use it like that.
I agree that the reliance on HM has its downsides and probably the change I think could have used more work if they wanted to go this route. I like most of the Ranger changes. But I don’t think they did quite enough to make this key feature of the class hit hard enough, pun intended.
The concentration doesn’t bother me as much, but if, for the Ranger only, HM scaled in damage maybe going to 2d6 on a hit then the capstone then going to 2d10 wouldn’t feel as lacking. Or something else, like the advantage on attacks on a marked target coming earlier.
One thing I agree with Nerd immersion it seemed odd for WotC to change Warlock and its invocations so they weren’t so tied to one spell, Eldritch Blast. Yet they did the opposite for Ranger.
the common problem i see people talk about for the new ranger is linked to one thing hunters mark the spell uses your con and is a BA to cast for just 1d6 on an attack.
some simple ways to fix it is at later levels allow it to be cast on a hit instead of a BA (like smite) and make it lose con (prob around 13th level) so it really feels like the rangers spell because they are the only ones who can use it like that.
I agree that the reliance on HM has its downsides and probably the change I think could have used more work if they wanted to go this route. I like most of the Ranger changes. But I don’t think they did quite enough to make this key feature of the class hit hard enough, pun intended.
The concentration doesn’t bother me as much, but if, for the Ranger only, HM scaled in damage maybe going to 2d6 on a hit then the capstone then going to 2d10 wouldn’t feel as lacking. Or something else, like the advantage on attacks on a marked target coming earlier.
One thing I agree with Nerd immersion it seemed odd for WotC to change Warlock and its invocations so they weren’t so tied to one spell, Eldritch Blast. Yet they did the opposite for Ranger.
One thing I'm not seeing acknowledged in all of this is that the subclasses are also adding damage - the Fey Wanderer and the Gloom Stalker can do additional psychic damage, and the Beast Master gets to eventually add Hunter's Mark damage to their pet's attacks as well. How balanced would all of that be if a third source of additional damage gets added into the mix?
Most of them, yes. The capstone is pretty lame, but the current campaign will be the first one since forever that makes it to lvl 20, and as a result bad capstone don't bother me too much.
I'll have to see how spells interact, and how many non concentration options the Ranger has before I get too worried about developer over-reliance on Hunter's Mark plays out. It's still an improvement over 2014 even in the worst case scenario.
the common problem i see people talk about for the new ranger is linked to one thing hunters mark the spell uses your con and is a BA to cast for just 1d6 on an attack.
some simple ways to fix it is at later levels allow it to be cast on a hit instead of a BA (like smite) and make it lose con (prob around 13th level) so it really feels like the rangers spell because they are the only ones who can use it like that.
I agree that the reliance on HM has its downsides and probably the change I think could have used more work if they wanted to go this route. I like most of the Ranger changes. But I don’t think they did quite enough to make this key feature of the class hit hard enough, pun intended.
The concentration doesn’t bother me as much, but if, for the Ranger only, HM scaled in damage maybe going to 2d6 on a hit then the capstone then going to 2d10 wouldn’t feel as lacking. Or something else, like the advantage on attacks on a marked target coming earlier.
One thing I agree with Nerd immersion it seemed odd for WotC to change Warlock and its invocations so they weren’t so tied to one spell, Eldritch Blast. Yet they did the opposite for Ranger.
One thing I'm not seeing acknowledged in all of this is that the subclasses are also adding damage - the Fey Wanderer and the Gloom Stalker can do additional psychic damage, and the Beast Master gets to eventually add Hunter's Mark damage to their pet's attacks as well. How balanced would all of that be if a third source of additional damage gets added into the mix?
I think I had mentioned something similar in another post. And I agree. Maybe there could be a step from d6 to d8 to eventually d10 but just getting d10 seems like not a great capstone. It just feels like it needs something if it’s going to be a class defining feature. Edit: it feels like most of the HM features just come too late. You get it at 1st level and then a gap before additional increases.
Is Hunter's mark once per turn? Did they seriously nerf it that badly? It's funny that they nerfed it and said you can cast it for free! At Lv17, it gives you advantage which is nice, but before that, a minute d6 in exchange for my concentration. Are you joking? I like Rangers. This sucks if the spell has been reduced to a d6.
Is Hunter's mark once per turn? Did they seriously nerf it that badly? It's funny that they nerfed it and said you can cast it for free! At Lv17, it gives you advantage which is nice, but before that, a minute d6 in exchange for my concentration. Are you joking? I like Rangers. This sucks if the spell has been reduced to a d6.
It was reduced to the first hit per turn in the UA6 playtest document, but I don’t think we’ve yet heard whether that change has been carried through to the new PHB.
Is Hunter's mark once per turn? Did they seriously nerf it that badly? It's funny that they nerfed it and said you can cast it for free! At Lv17, it gives you advantage which is nice, but before that, a minute d6 in exchange for my concentration. Are you joking? I like Rangers. This sucks if the spell has been reduced to a d6.
It was reduced to the first hit per turn in the UA6 playtest document, but I don’t think we’ve yet heard whether that change has been carried through to the new PHB.
I had forgotten about that. If they keep it that way then it’s a big nerf to Ranger making it one of their key features. Unless Rangers could bypass it then it’s fine
There's a bit of context that's being largely glossed over where people are only seeing the upscale of 1d6 to 1d10 as a singular increase.
Hunter's Mark's damage boost is no longer unspecified weapon damage. It's now Force damage.
If Hunter's Mark still triggers whenever you hit the marked target , which by that point you have advantage on (Unless cancelled by disadvantage), you're likely hitting between two and six times, subclass and features permitting. If you're a scimitar-wielding Beastmaster, depending on whether the Nick weapon feature can be triggered twice in a turn, you're making three or four attacks as part of your standard action. That's 4d10 instead of 4d6. Your beast also contributes, potentially having advantage on it's attacks and being eligible for the extra damage of Hunter's Mark. Depending on how Beastmaster companions scale, that could easily be another two attacks. So we're already looking at 5d10-6d10 FORCE damage per round from an effect that is unable to be disrupted, gives you advantage and that's before any additional benefits like haste.
Mileage may vary with other weapons, as with a longbow, you'd only get a potential 4d10 (Two from you, Two from beast). As noted in the above post, the other subclasses are expected to get benefits like psychic damage Yes, this is purely white-room speculation of a perfect combat round after one turn of setup in the case of the Beastmaster.
What isn't great is the fact that concentration is still used by Hunter's Mark is not ideal and maintaining what appears to be the central pillar of the class' functionality requires you to not use your spells like Ensnaring Strike or any other weapon-affecting spells. Yes, part of the fun of Rangers (particularly Beast Master and Drakewarden) is the puzzle-minigame of 'What does my Bonus Action do this turn!?' But it'd be nice if there was a way to have it all. I get why we don't.
At first glance, I was pretty disappointed with Ranger 2024 and that largely came from the context of which the official video - A lot of the key details weren't conveyed , but the follow-up D&D Beyond article was able to provide more clarity. I'll still reserve a final judgement for when I have the full class and subclass text available in the final publication. I get it - For most rangers it didn't feel like a particularly huge upgrade because most of us used the Tasha's features already and because of that, it didn't seem like we ended up with a whole lot of fun new features in comparison to other classes previewed before us. The new baseline features are markedly better, though, and a lot of the situational fluff that we never got to use got trimmed, which I'm all for.
We get a preview of spells in on July 1st - If Hunter's Mark isn't in the initial video, you can almost bet that it'll be in the article that goes up in the following days specifically to clear up any misconceptions on its' functionality.
I think the capstone should have let HM no longer require concentration in addition to the 1d10 upgrade. That would be a huge buff and feel worthy of getting a Ranger all the way to level 20.
(But to be clear,.I'm fine with the 2024 Ranger as-is.)
Although I still am going to find the concentration limiting, the more I think about it, getting to cast Hunter's Mark free twice a day does make it more flexible because it means I'll feel less stupid about dropping it and recasting within a single encounter if I want to use another spell for a particular turn. And having it prepared free maybe means I'll have access to an additional spell. There are several good spells that I would love my ranger to have situationally but not enough to displace the other four chosen spells (one of which is Hunter's Mark).
Being able to change spells on a long rest adds to the fun for me because it gives me something to think about and plan between games, if I so wish. I don't HAVE to, I can stick with my spells, but for people who LIKE homework, it's a great way to rabbithole for a few cycles learning ALL the spells your class has access to instead of just a couple.
Although I still am going to find the concentration limiting, the more I think about it, getting to cast Hunter's Mark free twice a day does make it more flexible because it means I'll feel less stupid about dropping it and recasting within a single encounter if I want to use another spell for a particular turn. And having it prepared free maybe means I'll have access to an additional spell. There are several good spells that I would love my ranger to have situationally but not enough to displace the other four chosen spells (one of which is Hunter's Mark).
Being able to change spells on a long rest adds to the fun for me because it gives me something to think about and plan between games, if I so wish. I don't HAVE to, I can stick with my spells, but for people who LIKE homework, it's a great way to rabbithole for a few cycles learning ALL the spells your class has access to instead of just a couple.
Although I still am going to find the concentration limiting, the more I think about it, getting to cast Hunter's Mark free twice a day does make it more flexible because it means I'll feel less stupid about dropping it and recasting within a single encounter if I want to use another spell for a particular turn. And having it prepared free maybe means I'll have access to an additional spell. There are several good spells that I would love my ranger to have situationally but not enough to displace the other four chosen spells (one of which is Hunter's Mark).
Being able to change spells on a long rest adds to the fun for me because it gives me something to think about and plan between games, if I so wish. I don't HAVE to, I can stick with my spells, but for people who LIKE homework, it's a great way to rabbithole for a few cycles learning ALL the spells your class has access to instead of just a couple.
The benefits of Hunter's Mark still apply if you upcast it, no? You don't have to use the free castings, I think they're there just to help out in early levels. So at lvl 20, you can cast it once, using a 5th level slot. It deals 3d10 damage, or 6d10 per turn if you're a beast master. You can't lose concentration on it, you always have advantage (so a higher chance to crit), and it also lasts for the entire day. You don't even have to cast it again.
I don't know why they doubled down on a spell, that most(at least from what ive seen and played) stopped using by level 5, there are far better spells to spend concentration on. (If Hunters Mark scaled better it might be slightly different.) The free castings are ok at best. The always being prepared is fine. Not Being able to lose concentration at 13 is a bit to late to be useful, I haven't been in many campaigns that go beyond 11. Free advantage at 17 is definitely to late to be useful, a good deal of things in other classes can do this in the level 3-5 range. just an extra 1d10 damage as a capstone isn't really a noticeable output on damage at that level and we get no extra perks? No thank you.
I do enjoy the Tashas features being baked in for the most park.
If I wanted Blindsight, I'd just take the fighting style.
The Weapon Master qualities will be great if players remember to use them or not outright banned by GM.
The Spell Swapping is great.
Nature's Veil is both a buff and a nerf, the invisible condition is nice, but can be easly detected at this levl by creatures/npcs with blindsight,tremorsense and magic.
The epic boon is the standard.
The 2 expertise kinda come too late to be useful
Not much to say on Beast Master, Gloom Stalker or Fey Wanderer as I never played them. (Gloom Stalker never really interested me, Fey never really got a chance to play and I've seen "pet" builds banned at a good deal of tables.
Hunter got streamlined a bit to much in my opinion, "we kept only the best options." Not everyone optimizes their build, flavor builds still exist for role-play's sake.
From what little they have said, Beast Master and Hunter suffer from the over dependence on Hunters mark.
And how often was Aragorn in full plate armor? The argument I was seeing in this thread is that STRangers were nerfed because a feature didn’t allow heavy armor. Isn’t that feature called Roving? Or something like that? I don’t have a chance to look right now. So it fits narratively that a feature named such doesn’t fit a heavily armor clad character. That’s what I was referring to.
You can still play your longsword wielding Ranger just like you could with 2014 Ranger who also didn’t have heavy armor proficiency. Nothing is stopping you. Just one feature may suffer for it.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
the common problem i see people talk about for the new ranger is linked to one thing hunters mark the spell uses your con and is a BA to cast for just 1d6 on an attack.
some simple ways to fix it is at later levels allow it to be cast on a hit instead of a BA (like smite) and make it lose con (prob around 13th level) so it really feels like the rangers spell because they are the only ones who can use it like that.
I agree that the reliance on HM has its downsides and probably the change I think could have used more work if they wanted to go this route. I like most of the Ranger changes. But I don’t think they did quite enough to make this key feature of the class hit hard enough, pun intended.
The concentration doesn’t bother me as much, but if, for the Ranger only, HM scaled in damage maybe going to 2d6 on a hit then the capstone then going to 2d10 wouldn’t feel as lacking. Or something else, like the advantage on attacks on a marked target coming earlier.
One thing I agree with Nerd immersion it seemed odd for WotC to change Warlock and its invocations so they weren’t so tied to one spell, Eldritch Blast. Yet they did the opposite for Ranger.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
One thing I'm not seeing acknowledged in all of this is that the subclasses are also adding damage - the Fey Wanderer and the Gloom Stalker can do additional psychic damage, and the Beast Master gets to eventually add Hunter's Mark damage to their pet's attacks as well. How balanced would all of that be if a third source of additional damage gets added into the mix?
Does anyone enjoy any changes in 2024? Just me?
You’re not alone. I’m looking forward to making my Ranger when we get the new PHB.
Most of them, yes. The capstone is pretty lame, but the current campaign will be the first one since forever that makes it to lvl 20, and as a result bad capstone don't bother me too much.
I'll have to see how spells interact, and how many non concentration options the Ranger has before I get too worried about developer over-reliance on Hunter's Mark plays out. It's still an improvement over 2014 even in the worst case scenario.
I think I had mentioned something similar in another post. And I agree. Maybe there could be a step from d6 to d8 to eventually d10 but just getting d10 seems like not a great capstone. It just feels like it needs something if it’s going to be a class defining feature. Edit: it feels like most of the HM features just come too late. You get it at 1st level and then a gap before additional increases.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
I like most of the changes so far. Even some of the nerfs, which have been few but mostly needed, I’m good with.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Is Hunter's mark once per turn? Did they seriously nerf it that badly? It's funny that they nerfed it and said you can cast it for free! At Lv17, it gives you advantage which is nice, but before that, a minute d6 in exchange for my concentration. Are you joking? I like Rangers. This sucks if the spell has been reduced to a d6.
Instagram/YouTube CeCe.Simulacrum
Twitch yourwelcomez
It was reduced to the first hit per turn in the UA6 playtest document, but I don’t think we’ve yet heard whether that change has been carried through to the new PHB.
I had forgotten about that. If they keep it that way then it’s a big nerf to Ranger making it one of their key features. Unless Rangers could bypass it then it’s fine
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
There's a bit of context that's being largely glossed over where people are only seeing the upscale of 1d6 to 1d10 as a singular increase.
Hunter's Mark's damage boost is no longer unspecified weapon damage. It's now Force damage.
If Hunter's Mark still triggers whenever you hit the marked target , which by that point you have advantage on (Unless cancelled by disadvantage), you're likely hitting between two and six times, subclass and features permitting.
If you're a scimitar-wielding Beastmaster, depending on whether the Nick weapon feature can be triggered twice in a turn, you're making three or four attacks as part of your standard action. That's 4d10 instead of 4d6.
Your beast also contributes, potentially having advantage on it's attacks and being eligible for the extra damage of Hunter's Mark. Depending on how Beastmaster companions scale, that could easily be another two attacks. So we're already looking at 5d10-6d10 FORCE damage per round from an effect that is unable to be disrupted, gives you advantage and that's before any additional benefits like haste.
Mileage may vary with other weapons, as with a longbow, you'd only get a potential 4d10 (Two from you, Two from beast).
As noted in the above post, the other subclasses are expected to get benefits like psychic damage
Yes, this is purely white-room speculation of a perfect combat round after one turn of setup in the case of the Beastmaster.
What isn't great is the fact that concentration is still used by Hunter's Mark is not ideal and maintaining what appears to be the central pillar of the class' functionality requires you to not use your spells like Ensnaring Strike or any other weapon-affecting spells. Yes, part of the fun of Rangers (particularly Beast Master and Drakewarden) is the puzzle-minigame of 'What does my Bonus Action do this turn!?'
But it'd be nice if there was a way to have it all. I get why we don't.
At first glance, I was pretty disappointed with Ranger 2024 and that largely came from the context of which the official video - A lot of the key details weren't conveyed , but the follow-up D&D Beyond article was able to provide more clarity. I'll still reserve a final judgement for when I have the full class and subclass text available in the final publication. I get it - For most rangers it didn't feel like a particularly huge upgrade because most of us used the Tasha's features already and because of that, it didn't seem like we ended up with a whole lot of fun new features in comparison to other classes previewed before us. The new baseline features are markedly better, though, and a lot of the situational fluff that we never got to use got trimmed, which I'm all for.
We get a preview of spells in on July 1st - If Hunter's Mark isn't in the initial video, you can almost bet that it'll be in the article that goes up in the following days specifically to clear up any misconceptions on its' functionality.
Yea....
I'm still dissapointed.
2014 5E mostly
3.5 maybe.
I think the capstone should have let HM no longer require concentration in addition to the 1d10 upgrade. That would be a huge buff and feel worthy of getting a Ranger all the way to level 20.
(But to be clear,.I'm fine with the 2024 Ranger as-is.)
Although I still am going to find the concentration limiting, the more I think about it, getting to cast Hunter's Mark free twice a day does make it more flexible because it means I'll feel less stupid about dropping it and recasting within a single encounter if I want to use another spell for a particular turn. And having it prepared free maybe means I'll have access to an additional spell. There are several good spells that I would love my ranger to have situationally but not enough to displace the other four chosen spells (one of which is Hunter's Mark).
Being able to change spells on a long rest adds to the fun for me because it gives me something to think about and plan between games, if I so wish. I don't HAVE to, I can stick with my spells, but for people who LIKE homework, it's a great way to rabbithole for a few cycles learning ALL the spells your class has access to instead of just a couple.
Per the article - 2024 Ranger vs. 2014 Ranger: What’s New | Dungeons & Dragons (dndbeyond.com) - You'll get additional free casts of Hunter's Mark as you level, apparently capping out at six non-spell slot castings at level 17 (See under Precise Hunter.)
its free castings equal to proficiency bonus
The benefits of Hunter's Mark still apply if you upcast it, no? You don't have to use the free castings, I think they're there just to help out in early levels. So at lvl 20, you can cast it once, using a 5th level slot. It deals 3d10 damage, or 6d10 per turn if you're a beast master. You can't lose concentration on it, you always have advantage (so a higher chance to crit), and it also lasts for the entire day. You don't even have to cast it again.
I don't know why they doubled down on a spell, that most(at least from what ive seen and played) stopped using by level 5, there are far better spells to spend concentration on. (If Hunters Mark scaled better it might be slightly different.) The free castings are ok at best. The always being prepared is fine. Not Being able to lose concentration at 13 is a bit to late to be useful, I haven't been in many campaigns that go beyond 11. Free advantage at 17 is definitely to late to be useful, a good deal of things in other classes can do this in the level 3-5 range. just an extra 1d10 damage as a capstone isn't really a noticeable output on damage at that level and we get no extra perks? No thank you.
I do enjoy the Tashas features being baked in for the most park.
If I wanted Blindsight, I'd just take the fighting style.
The Weapon Master qualities will be great if players remember to use them or not outright banned by GM.
The Spell Swapping is great.
Nature's Veil is both a buff and a nerf, the invisible condition is nice, but can be easly detected at this levl by creatures/npcs with blindsight,tremorsense and magic.
The epic boon is the standard.
The 2 expertise kinda come too late to be useful
Not much to say on Beast Master, Gloom Stalker or Fey Wanderer as I never played them. (Gloom Stalker never really interested me, Fey never really got a chance to play and I've seen "pet" builds banned at a good deal of tables.
Hunter got streamlined a bit to much in my opinion, "we kept only the best options." Not everyone optimizes their build, flavor builds still exist for role-play's sake.
From what little they have said, Beast Master and Hunter suffer from the over dependence on Hunters mark.