I've heard of there's this thing called a revised Ranger, but I don't really know much about it. Does D&D beyond use this "revised" Ranger, and why did rangers need to be re used in the first place?
DNDBeyond doesn't use the revised Ranger because it never left UA. They tried it out because most people think Rangers are bad - especially Beast Master. Instead they started releasing new subclasses which are much better.
The new class feature variants in Tasha's has some of the things or similar things from the revised Ranger that should offer what people want instead.
I guess Emmber covered the most important bit. The ranger was "revised" because a lot of people feel that many of their features don't work very well and/or are underwhelming.
For me, the favoured terrain/enemy features are just really hard to use... If you pick them blindly without knowing the campain setting very well, they'll often never see use, and if you do pick to match the campaign setting they'll often seem like a constant constant on feature... This type of mechanic just doesn't work very well.
Ontop of that, one of the most thematically interesting ranger subclasses the "beastmaster" has especially poor mechanics which leads the their main feature (The beast/pet) often being a burden rather than a boon.
Tasha's does help some of these issues, and others are sadly still there.
I guess my point was that I don't find the instance of where the favoured terrain is almost always online to be very appealing either... It feels like a feature that's supposed to be useful when you happen to find yourself in the right terrain, but I just don't see that happening in a dynamic natural way in my games, which is why i dislike how the feature works.
Favored enemy as well. Both features are imported from previous editions and they are flavor pretending to be mechanics. The Ranger is weak because it gets nothing useful for the multiple levels that it receives these features.
It's not just that it only applies in certain terrain or vs. certain enemies. It's also that even the bonus given in those situations isn't that important. If the story revolves around the party tracking goblins to their lair and you fail to track the goblins to their lair, what is typically the consequences here? At 95% of tables you will get one of two outcomes:
DM prepared all this goblin stuff and wants to use it, so you end up finding the lair anyway. Maybe you get some minor penalty like a level of exhaustion for taking extra time or a complete non-penalty like "you take an extra day to find the lair."
You lose the goblins and have to go find other stuff to do. The game must go on after all. Maybe you get a narrative penalty relating to the goblins still being at large that eventually sends you to 1).
Yes, it's filthy metagaming, but that doesn't make it less true. The stuff Rangers are good at just isn't needed to succeed in the big picture. It can't be needed in pre-written adventures because you don't know what the party will be so you need to be able to handle a party that sucks at tracking. Meanwhile they're falling behind in combat and social encounters because they have been deemed "Exploration, the class (except only good at very small slices of it)."
If I sound bitter, it's because I am. I love the flavor of Ranger. Many of my characters gravitate towards "nature guy who's good at fighting," but I can't build a Ranger I'm happy with and always end up doing a Fighter or Barbarian or Rogue that fills the archetype while also pulling its own weight in the party. I never played the Revised Ranger, but I love the Class Feature Variants UA that should appear hopefully more or less intact with Tasha's and once they appear in DDB I will not be looking back.
If I sound bitter, it's because I am. I love the flavor of Ranger. Many of my characters gravitate towards "nature guy who's good at fighting," but I can't build a Ranger I'm happy with and always end up doing a Fighter or Barbarian or Rogue that fills the archetype while also pulling its own weight in the party. I never played the Revised Ranger, but I love the Class Feature Variants UA that should appear hopefully more or less intact with Tasha's and once they appear in DDB I will not be looking back.
I'm exactly like that. I have a few characters that would make great Rangers - but any time I try to make a Ranger I see the Favoured Terrain/Enemy and think - nah. I could make them better with something else. Scout Rogue is the usual go-to. Free expertise in Survival and Nature - yes please.
I've heard of there's this thing called a revised Ranger, but I don't really know much about it. Does D&D beyond use this "revised" Ranger, and why did rangers need to be re used in the first place?
DNDBeyond doesn't use the revised Ranger because it never left UA. They tried it out because most people think Rangers are bad - especially Beast Master. Instead they started releasing new subclasses which are much better.
The new class feature variants in Tasha's has some of the things or similar things from the revised Ranger that should offer what people want instead.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
I guess Emmber covered the most important bit. The ranger was "revised" because a lot of people feel that many of their features don't work very well and/or are underwhelming.
For me, the favoured terrain/enemy features are just really hard to use... If you pick them blindly without knowing the campain setting very well, they'll often never see use, and if you do pick to match the campaign setting they'll often seem like a constant constant on feature... This type of mechanic just doesn't work very well.
Ontop of that, one of the most thematically interesting ranger subclasses the "beastmaster" has especially poor mechanics which leads the their main feature (The beast/pet) often being a burden rather than a boon.
Tasha's does help some of these issues, and others are sadly still there.
I guess my point was that I don't find the instance of where the favoured terrain is almost always online to be very appealing either... It feels like a feature that's supposed to be useful when you happen to find yourself in the right terrain, but I just don't see that happening in a dynamic natural way in my games, which is why i dislike how the feature works.
Favored enemy as well. Both features are imported from previous editions and they are flavor pretending to be mechanics. The Ranger is weak because it gets nothing useful for the multiple levels that it receives these features.
It's not just that it only applies in certain terrain or vs. certain enemies. It's also that even the bonus given in those situations isn't that important. If the story revolves around the party tracking goblins to their lair and you fail to track the goblins to their lair, what is typically the consequences here? At 95% of tables you will get one of two outcomes:
Yes, it's filthy metagaming, but that doesn't make it less true. The stuff Rangers are good at just isn't needed to succeed in the big picture. It can't be needed in pre-written adventures because you don't know what the party will be so you need to be able to handle a party that sucks at tracking. Meanwhile they're falling behind in combat and social encounters because they have been deemed "Exploration, the class (except only good at very small slices of it)."
If I sound bitter, it's because I am. I love the flavor of Ranger. Many of my characters gravitate towards "nature guy who's good at fighting," but I can't build a Ranger I'm happy with and always end up doing a Fighter or Barbarian or Rogue that fills the archetype while also pulling its own weight in the party. I never played the Revised Ranger, but I love the Class Feature Variants UA that should appear hopefully more or less intact with Tasha's and once they appear in DDB I will not be looking back.
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
I'm exactly like that. I have a few characters that would make great Rangers - but any time I try to make a Ranger I see the Favoured Terrain/Enemy and think - nah. I could make them better with something else. Scout Rogue is the usual go-to. Free expertise in Survival and Nature - yes please.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).