I've made a lot of mistakes in my very short career as a DM for my friends. Between trying to build a brand-new world and homebrew campaign from scratch for my FIRST-EVER CAMPAIGN, making a bunch of ill-conceived rulings, handing out way too many magic items that are now ruining my day, and screwing up party balance by giving my warlock player a custom patron that... *sigh*
ANYWAY its fine, because I've been consistently looking at all kinds of guides and research, developing a DMing philosophy that keeps things fun, playing for the purpose of my player's enjoyment, and I have a good relationship with the players. I'm improving. But I wanna do a thing and figured maybe I'd run it by the internet before potentially making another balancing mistake.
One of my players is an Elf Ranger, which I've heard and seen a lot of "This is the worst class and is clearly not very fun or even really that good in combat"
I don't think my player has realized this yet, (bless them they are such a joy--they giggle with anticipation with every single ability check and saving throw and I love them) and I'd rather they didn't have to deal with when later down the road the Warlock is kicking orcs and taking names (especially since we rolled stats and the warlock has had max CHA from the get-go) and they're dealing with how limiting a ranger's abilities really are.
Basically my question is this: If I added a Ranger Class Feature that reads as such:
At xth Level, you gain the acumen necessary to shoot multiple arrows at once. When attacking with a bow you are proficient with, you may forego any bonuses to attack to launch two arrows at once at any one creature, adding another attack die to your roll on a hit. (At yth level they may add two attack die, and at zth level a third, shooting four arrows at once if they so choose).
Is this a stupid idea? Will this make my Ranger immediately outclass the warlock and our other player? (Rogue that's about to Multiclass Fighter, also thinking about how to help that one. Probably just a magic item or armor+2 or something down the line because their gameplay-competence more than makes up for any limitations) Or is the rule-of-cool enough to justify slapping WotC balancing efforts in the face?... again?
Thanks!
(I feel like y'all are gonna tell me "dude stop homebrewing everything" but honestly I'm too far down the line to stop now so I will thank all such responses for their candor but also I will ignore their advice :D)
((I completely failed at keeping this short))
EDIT:
I am a storm-blasted fool.
Literally just checked the ranger class and it has an extra attack option which makes this ability overpowered, and my player's archetype includes "Volley".
*siiigggh* Okay. That's fine. Amending the class feature to remove scaling. Would this still be a broken ability then?
If you want something similar, maybe give them an ability similar to two weapon fighting.
For reference:
Two-Weapon Fighting
When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
The modified ability:
Multi-Arrow
When you take the Attack action and attack with a weapon that requires Ammunition, you can use a bonus action to make an additional attack with that weapon. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
If you want something similar, maybe give them an ability similar to two weapon fighting.
For reference:
Two-Weapon Fighting
When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
The modified ability:
Multi-Arrow
When you take the Attack action and attack with a weapon that requires Ammunition, you can use a bonus action to make an additional attack with that weapon. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
Edit: noticed a loophole regarding weapons.
Ooh, that's cool!
Also, does the ranger in question have zephyr strike? I haven't played ranger, but heard that's a super fun spell. I would just jot it down, or get it a la carte if you don't have whatever book it's in.
Also, not every player is there to play a super optimized character. By all means strive for balance, through abilities or magic items, but it's okay if it's not perfect.
One last thing. My fencing teacher says, "If you're not getting hit, you're not learning." Mistakes happen more when you are stretching your abilities, and less when you stay within the confines of familiarity. This is a good thing--especially with everyone having fun in the process! Keep it up!
I think you are trying to fix something that "ain't broke". You said that the player is having fun. I think their opinion should mater more than what a bunch of people on the internet are saying.
I recently played a Wood Elf Ranger in a campaign for levels 1-15 and I really enjoyed it. At no point did I feel my character was "not fun" or "not good in combat." I was even a Beast Master and chose an Osprey [Sea Eagle] companion. In short I did the things I wanted for my character without concern for what the guides said, and I HAD FUN! [It was a pirate campaign and my favored terrain was coastal.]
A ranger already gets an extra attack at 5th level, just as the other fighter type classes do. This means they can fire twice per round with a long or short bow, since neither has the Loading property that a crossbow has. Also, if your player does prefer a cross-bow, this restriction is easily overcome with the Crossbow Expert Feat.
Don't get me wrong, I think it is wonderful that you are looking out for your player and wanting to insure that they have fun. I just think you may be worrying about something that isn't really a problem. I know plenty of people disagree, but I LIKE the ranger class. It has been a favorite of mine through multiple editions and campaigns. So "experts" may say that I wasn't supposed to have fun with Aella Morgant. I did everything wrong and never tried to "optimize" her. The point is I DID have fun. I enjoyed the character all the way through -- and that includes her friendly rivalry with her brother who was a straight fighter. Sure he could do things I couldn't, but the opposite is equally true. I had my share of epic moments!
If you are really concerned about the playability of the class, I'd say to talk to the player. Maybe there is a feat, ability or item that they would particularly like, and you can use that. Otherwise, well... as implied at the beginning, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." In my opinion the Ranger class ain't broke.
If you worry about the Ranger, consider using UA variant Ranger. It is going to be the official optional rule on Nov 17, 2020 anyway.
The problem with Ranger is just that it gets 4 useless class future. The UA variant just replaces those 4 and it would be fine.
I am playing Ranger (it does have Max-Dex from the get-go) currently. It is at a low level, but I think it is fine so far. Archery Ranger may not have the raw damage as but it has utility. It is a swiss knife class. For example, when our Cleric is unconscious, I am the one who heals him back. I can sneak into places as a rogue does, I can find food and water as a druid does. I can be the lookout for the group. I have the woodcarver skill and I can create tools in the mid of nowhere for my group.
Ranger and Rogue can have may skills that works outside of combat. So, don't run pure combat. Have them tracking stuff, find food sneak into some place...etc.
You do know that the ranger gets an extra attack at 5th level right? It is a class feature.
Hunter ranger is decent, gloomstalker ranger is really pretty good. Most complaints are about the beastmaster ranger in the PHB and how it doesn't really work as a pet class plus the ranger exploration abilities tend to either be useless or essentially automatically overcome some challenges thus not providing good opportunities for actual use.
End game may be different but up through level 10, between their spell choices (hunters mark), extra attack and other options ... rangers aren't horrible.
However, you mention rolled stats, the warlock starting with 20 ... if he ranger started with 14 dex due to rolls then your problem isn't the class it is rolling for stats. The warlock has a +3 advantage on attack rolls and a +3 advantage on damage on every eldritch blast and they can use hex with it. The warlock will be outdamaging the ranger for quite a while due to stats not class.
There are a couple of feats that can help the ranger out - Crossbow expert lets them wield a hand crossbow and gain a bonus action attack with it (plus they can use ranged weapons with an opponent next to them without having disadvantage on their attack rolls). If you add the sharpshooter feat then the ranger gets to ignore 1/2 and 3/4 cover as well as fire at long range with no penalties. They also have the option to apply -5 to hit and +10 to damage which can be partially offset by having the archery fighting style. This isn't that useful at lower levels but becomes more useful at level 8+.
However, none of this will help that much if the ranger has much lower stats due to dice rolls at the very beginning.
Anyway :) ... the bottom line is that being a ranger is much less likely to be an issue that the rolled stats. On the other hand, if the ranger has an 18 dex compared to the warlocks 20 then they should be fine. In either case, look into feats like crossbow expert or sharpshooter as ways to boost the effectiveness of the ranger. (Also look into the UA ranger as an option). However, your suggestion of giving them two attacks for every attack ... essentially giving them four attacks at level 5 when they pick up extra attack is a bit much ... you might consider a magic item that would grant them the crossbow expert feat though that is also a bit powerful).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Okay, gonna try and keep this short.
I've made a lot of mistakes in my very short career as a DM for my friends. Between trying to build a brand-new world and homebrew campaign from scratch for my FIRST-EVER CAMPAIGN, making a bunch of ill-conceived rulings, handing out way too many magic items that are now ruining my day, and screwing up party balance by giving my warlock player a custom patron that... *sigh*
ANYWAY its fine, because I've been consistently looking at all kinds of guides and research, developing a DMing philosophy that keeps things fun, playing for the purpose of my player's enjoyment, and I have a good relationship with the players. I'm improving. But I wanna do a thing and figured maybe I'd run it by the internet before potentially making another balancing mistake.
One of my players is an Elf Ranger, which I've heard and seen a lot of "This is the worst class and is clearly not very fun or even really that good in combat"
I don't think my player has realized this yet, (bless them they are such a joy--they giggle with anticipation with every single ability check and saving throw and I love them) and I'd rather they didn't have to deal with when later down the road the Warlock is kicking orcs and taking names (especially since we rolled stats and the warlock has had max CHA from the get-go) and they're dealing with how limiting a ranger's abilities really are.
Basically my question is this: If I added a Ranger Class Feature that reads as such:
At xth Level, you gain the acumen necessary to shoot multiple arrows at once. When attacking with a bow you are proficient with, you may forego any bonuses to attack to launch two arrows at once at any one creature, adding another attack die to your roll on a hit.
(At yth level they may add two attack die, and at zth level a third, shooting four arrows at once if they so choose).Is this a stupid idea? Will this make my Ranger immediately outclass the warlock and our other player? (Rogue that's about to Multiclass Fighter, also thinking about how to help that one. Probably just a magic item or armor+2 or something down the line because their gameplay-competence more than makes up for any limitations) Or is the rule-of-cool enough to justify slapping WotC balancing efforts in the face?... again?
Thanks!
(I feel like y'all are gonna tell me "dude stop homebrewing everything" but honestly I'm too far down the line to stop now so I will thank all such responses for their candor but also I will ignore their advice :D)
((I completely failed at keeping this short))
EDIT:
I am a storm-blasted fool.
Literally just checked the ranger class and it has an extra attack option which makes this ability overpowered, and my player's archetype includes "Volley".
*siiigggh* Okay. That's fine. Amending the class feature to remove scaling. Would this still be a broken ability then?
If you want something similar, maybe give them an ability similar to two weapon fighting.
For reference:
Two-Weapon Fighting
When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
The modified ability:
Multi-Arrow
When you take the Attack action and attack with a weapon that requires Ammunition, you can use a bonus action to make an additional attack with that weapon. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
Edit: noticed a loophole regarding weapons.
Ooh, that's cool!
Also, does the ranger in question have zephyr strike? I haven't played ranger, but heard that's a super fun spell. I would just jot it down, or get it a la carte if you don't have whatever book it's in.
Also, not every player is there to play a super optimized character. By all means strive for balance, through abilities or magic items, but it's okay if it's not perfect.
One last thing. My fencing teacher says, "If you're not getting hit, you're not learning." Mistakes happen more when you are stretching your abilities, and less when you stay within the confines of familiarity. This is a good thing--especially with everyone having fun in the process! Keep it up!
I think you are trying to fix something that "ain't broke". You said that the player is having fun. I think their opinion should mater more than what a bunch of people on the internet are saying.
I recently played a Wood Elf Ranger in a campaign for levels 1-15 and I really enjoyed it. At no point did I feel my character was "not fun" or "not good in combat." I was even a Beast Master and chose an Osprey [Sea Eagle] companion. In short I did the things I wanted for my character without concern for what the guides said, and I HAD FUN! [It was a pirate campaign and my favored terrain was coastal.]
A ranger already gets an extra attack at 5th level, just as the other fighter type classes do. This means they can fire twice per round with a long or short bow, since neither has the Loading property that a crossbow has. Also, if your player does prefer a cross-bow, this restriction is easily overcome with the Crossbow Expert Feat.
Don't get me wrong, I think it is wonderful that you are looking out for your player and wanting to insure that they have fun. I just think you may be worrying about something that isn't really a problem. I know plenty of people disagree, but I LIKE the ranger class. It has been a favorite of mine through multiple editions and campaigns. So "experts" may say that I wasn't supposed to have fun with Aella Morgant. I did everything wrong and never tried to "optimize" her. The point is I DID have fun. I enjoyed the character all the way through -- and that includes her friendly rivalry with her brother who was a straight fighter. Sure he could do things I couldn't, but the opposite is equally true. I had my share of epic moments!
If you are really concerned about the playability of the class, I'd say to talk to the player. Maybe there is a feat, ability or item that they would particularly like, and you can use that. Otherwise, well... as implied at the beginning, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." In my opinion the Ranger class ain't broke.
If you worry about the Ranger, consider using UA variant Ranger. It is going to be the official optional rule on Nov 17, 2020 anyway.
The problem with Ranger is just that it gets 4 useless class future. The UA variant just replaces those 4 and it would be fine.
I am playing Ranger (it does have Max-Dex from the get-go) currently. It is at a low level, but I think it is fine so far. Archery Ranger may not have the raw damage as but it has utility. It is a swiss knife class. For example, when our Cleric is unconscious, I am the one who heals him back. I can sneak into places as a rogue does, I can find food and water as a druid does. I can be the lookout for the group. I have the woodcarver skill and I can create tools in the mid of nowhere for my group.
Ranger and Rogue can have may skills that works outside of combat. So, don't run pure combat. Have them tracking stuff, find food sneak into some place...etc.
You do know that the ranger gets an extra attack at 5th level right? It is a class feature.
Hunter ranger is decent, gloomstalker ranger is really pretty good. Most complaints are about the beastmaster ranger in the PHB and how it doesn't really work as a pet class plus the ranger exploration abilities tend to either be useless or essentially automatically overcome some challenges thus not providing good opportunities for actual use.
End game may be different but up through level 10, between their spell choices (hunters mark), extra attack and other options ... rangers aren't horrible.
However, you mention rolled stats, the warlock starting with 20 ... if he ranger started with 14 dex due to rolls then your problem isn't the class it is rolling for stats. The warlock has a +3 advantage on attack rolls and a +3 advantage on damage on every eldritch blast and they can use hex with it. The warlock will be outdamaging the ranger for quite a while due to stats not class.
There are a couple of feats that can help the ranger out - Crossbow expert lets them wield a hand crossbow and gain a bonus action attack with it (plus they can use ranged weapons with an opponent next to them without having disadvantage on their attack rolls). If you add the sharpshooter feat then the ranger gets to ignore 1/2 and 3/4 cover as well as fire at long range with no penalties. They also have the option to apply -5 to hit and +10 to damage which can be partially offset by having the archery fighting style. This isn't that useful at lower levels but becomes more useful at level 8+.
However, none of this will help that much if the ranger has much lower stats due to dice rolls at the very beginning.
Anyway :) ... the bottom line is that being a ranger is much less likely to be an issue that the rolled stats. On the other hand, if the ranger has an 18 dex compared to the warlocks 20 then they should be fine. In either case, look into feats like crossbow expert or sharpshooter as ways to boost the effectiveness of the ranger. (Also look into the UA ranger as an option). However, your suggestion of giving them two attacks for every attack ... essentially giving them four attacks at level 5 when they pick up extra attack is a bit much ... you might consider a magic item that would grant them the crossbow expert feat though that is also a bit powerful).