Why does it always seem like the same people that say something like "that ranger ability is bad" then have the most restrictive possible interpretation possible of that ability also seem to be the same people that say something like "that (fill in what ever class ability) is amazing" and then take the most generous interpretation possible?
"Yeah. Primeval awareness could work like that, but that's not how I play it, and it sucks."
"Wizards are awesome! No. I don't bother with spell components or their gold piece costs."
"Ranger abilities are useless. No. We don't use overland travel or exploration rules. We just get to the next town or fight."
"Crossbow expert fighters do the most damage and are awesome! No. I don't track ammunition.
"Hunting and survival are pointless. No. We don't worry about encumbrance or food and water."
"up to" does not indicate fixed or variable by itself, and requires context. It is a colloquial way to indicate a maximum, and in context of these abilities indicates the maximum extent or range of the effect. In general, specific actions that say "up to" , "within" or other language that set a maximum, usually means you choose a specific distance or location up to that maximum, but there is a clear subset of abilities and rules relating to perception that are fixed. When it says, you can see up to 1 mile in certain visibility, you don't get to choose to see only up to 1/2 a mile. the "up to" is fixed and is the limit of your perception. Likewise, if you can see up to or within 60 feet normally with darkvision, you don't get to choose to see only up to 30 feet.
Primeval Awareness is a perceptive ability to perceive the existence of certain creatures. It makes the most sense that it would function like any other perceptive sense, and "up to" would mean a fixed range in which the effect works every time.
so, I want to question why you think darkvision you don’t choose to see 30 feet vs 60 feet?
does the eagle eye barbarian totem then have to be forced to only see things 1 mile away and everything before it?
Is there no longer the capacity to restrict how far you want to “focus” a sense?
I would like to know where this rule is stated that “up to” is always a max distance/use?
Lay on hands uses “up to” guess you now HAVE to use your entire lay on hands pool if someone is damaged more than you have lay on hands points. Because it’s up to, and “up to is fixed” so.... or are we ignoring that lay on hands is up. Or changing the definition of up to for a different ability that fits a different narrative?
I am just looking for clarification of why up to for vision, up to for primeval awareness up to for bless up to for lay on hands etc etc all mean a different up to.
"up to" does not indicate fixed or variable by itself, and requires context. It is a colloquial way to indicate a maximum, and in context of these abilities indicates the maximum extent or range of the effect. In general, specific actions that say "up to" , "within" or other language that set a maximum, usually means you choose a specific distance or location up to that maximum, but there is a clear subset of abilities and rules relating to perception that are fixed. When it says, you can see up to 1 mile in certain visibility, you don't get to choose to see only up to 1/2 a mile. the "up to" is fixed and is the limit of your perception. Likewise, if you can see up to or within 60 feet normally with darkvision, you don't get to choose to see only up to 30 feet.
Primeval Awareness is a perceptive ability to perceive the existence of certain creatures. It makes the most sense that it would function like any other perceptive sense, and "up to" would mean a fixed range in which the effect works every time.
so, I want to question why you think darkvision you don’t choose to see 30 feet vs 60 feet?
You don't have to choose. The range is fixed, and you have darkvision within the entire range. the "up to" or "within" states the maximum limit of the perception. You see the creature 30 feet away and the creature 60 feet away, both at once. What I was saying was that it is a "passive" feature; while its "on" (which is always unless you are granted it by a spell or item), you can't change the maximum range of it. All perception features work like this
does the eagle eye barbarian totem then have to be forced to only see things 1 mile away and everything before it?
They can see everything between 0 feet and 1 mile from them, unless blocked by another thing. They can't adjust this, but they get the benefit from the full range
Is there no longer the capacity to restrict how far you want to “focus” a sense?
Please tell me how you would "focus" your sight without the use of tools. You have sight. The limit is determined by outside forces, such as weather, obstructions, darkness, etc. Please tell me how you would "focus" your smell, or touch, or any other sense you have, without the use of tools (note, your hands count as tools in the case of hearing, since they are not integral to those sense organs)
I would like to know where this rule is stated that “up to” is always a max distance/use
The Dictionary. 5e uses common language. you can find the definition pretty easily by googling "up to".
Lay on hands uses “up to” guess you now HAVE to use your entire lay on hands pool if someone is damaged more than you have lay on hands points. Because it’s up to, and “up to is fixed” so.... or are we ignoring that lay on hands is up. Or changing the definition of up to for a different ability that fits a different narrative?
I never said you have to use the maximum. I said you can't change what the maximum is. If you have 40 Lay on Hands points, you can't declare you now have 30, or 45. You have 40 max. It doesn't matter how many you use. Also, Lay on Hands is not a perception ability, it is an effect, and I clearly stated that non-perception effects allow you to choose how many to expend or how to focus the ability
I am just looking for clarification of why up to for vision, up to for primeval awareness up to for bless up to for lay on hands etc etc all mean a different up to.
Read my post again. "Up to", for non-perceptive abilities, means you can choose how to focus. But the "natural" understanding of perception is that "up to" only represents a fixed maximum; the limit to which you can perceive. Your perception automatically includes everything between the minimum and the maximum, as dictated by outside forces (tools, obstructions, etc), but you yourself don't have any natural control over the maximum (to raise or lower it) unless you have something else (an outside force) that would allow that. Thats not explicit in the rules, but it is how perception works in the real world, and is a valid assumption to make in adjudicating this abillity as a DM.
"up to" does not indicate fixed or variable by itself, and requires context. It is a colloquial way to indicate a maximum, and in context of these abilities indicates the maximum extent or range of the effect. In general, specific actions that say "up to" , "within" or other language that set a maximum, usually means you choose a specific distance or location up to that maximum, but there is a clear subset of abilities and rules relating to perception that are fixed. When it says, you can see up to 1 mile in certain visibility, you don't get to choose to see only up to 1/2 a mile. the "up to" is fixed and is the limit of your perception. Likewise, if you can see up to or within 60 feet normally with darkvision, you don't get to choose to see only up to 30 feet.
Primeval Awareness is a perceptive ability to perceive the existence of certain creatures. It makes the most sense that it would function like any other perceptive sense, and "up to" would mean a fixed range in which the effect works every time.
It's not a bad way to look at it, but it's only an interpretation, and does not explain the difference between wording of the standard use and the extended wording, and neither does it explain that the use of this power has a duration but requires only one action if it was that simple. As with a lot of things in 5e, it's for the DM to rule, and in addition to all the other, I would have a tendency to rule favourably in terms of powers that are honestly hard to abuse and powers that are abused by powergamers on technicalities when the intent is obviously different.
Obviously we would rule differently here. I prefer to use real world understandings of perception to dictate abilities that are a type of perception. that understanding says that perception is limited by outside forces, not controlled internally. If I can see, there is a limit to that perception, but I have no control over that limit without using tools, obstructions, or "turning off" the sense (by closing my eyes).
Without clear guidance on how this perceptive ability works, I have to assume it works like real perceptive senses, because that is the only reference I have.
“If you have 40 Lay on Hands points, you can't declare you now have 30, or 45.”
-but I can declare I now have 30. 30 is less than 40. It means I have used 10.
“Please tell me how you would "focus" your sight without the use of tools.”
-squinting for one
Please tell me how, through squinting, you were able to consciously change your, lets say, 6 mile range of sight to specifically and exactly 100 feet, or 1 mile. That is the comparison being made here. Besides, this ability doesn't have an actual sense organ associated with it. And your eyelid is technically an "obstacle" to your sense organ, not the organ itself.
Also, and again, the Lay on Hands is moot to my point...its not a perception based skill. And your maximum is still 40, even if you have used some from time to time. You just have 30 left, but it's not your maximum.
“If you have 40 Lay on Hands points, you can't declare you now have 30, or 45.”
-but I can declare I now have 30. 30 is less than 40. It means I have used 10.
“Please tell me how you would "focus" your sight without the use of tools.”
-squinting for one
Please tell me how, through squinting, you were able to consciously change your, lets say, 6 mile range of sight to specifically and exactly 100 feet, or 1 mile. That is the comparison being made here. Besides, this ability doesn't have an actual sense organ associated with it. And your eyelid is technically an "obstacle" to your sense organ, not the organ itself.
Also, and again, the Lay on Hands is moot to my point...its not a perception based skill. And your maximum is still 40, even if you have used some from time to time. You just have 30 left, but it's not your maximum.
Your tone, and condescending manner aside.
people who are near or far sighted. Squint to focus their vision. This is a very common thing.
you can admit you’re wrong or misspoke about stuff and no one will think less of you. People will think less of you if you talk down to everyone like they are stupid, or tell them to read dictionaries when they try to engage you in a friendly conversation. You are going on my block list, just to inform you.
I've thought about it and I have to strongly disagree with the idea that primeval awareness is somehow tied to normal sight or whatever. This is literally a magical power. You are expending magical energy through your spell slots to "...focus your awareness on the region around you..." The major difference being that the ranger's tie to some land types improves this focus. Now let me say I stand firm that this ability is meant to work alongside all of the ranger's other abilities and spells (and beast if you're a beast master), in that a 6 mile distance is really nothing at that point. But that aside, to make a personal ruling based on your interpretation that the ranger has zero control over this focusing of controlled magic energy in their ideal environment is ludicrous. Someone can see.
I'd also like to add that tracking is limited by the environment, made easier or more difficult or even impossible by the environment. If you are out at sea, in the air, underground, blind, on a hard smooth surface, looking for creatures that are traveling by flight, hovering, swimming, or any other situation similar in that there is nothing on the ground to track, no ranger, scout rogue, druid or anything can track it normally. This is where magic can be helpful, yes. But this is also were a ranger and a level one spell slot can, at the very least, be able to get information that no one else can. And I'm sorry to bring this up, but this is also were the PHB beast mast really comes in hard. Flight, or advantage to track with sight, hearing, or SMELL is HUGE! This is literally why folks use dogs to hunt and track.
Do you mean feature? Singular? Or are you referring to the baseline ranger’s single feature with all of the features all of the subclasses gained at level 3? Or are you trolling the discussion? Also, useless is relative. I’m sorry you’ve had bad experiences.
Do you mean feature? Singular? Or are you referring to the baseline ranger’s single feature with all of the features all of the subclasses gained at level 3? Or are you trolling the discussion? Also, useless is relative. I’m sorry you’ve had bad experiences.
Pretty sure they are talking about favorite terrain, favorite enemy, and primeval awareness. Since those features are widely regarded as largely useless except in very niche campaigns.
I even said this exact sentence in a previous comment.
I agree that if your enemy and terrain are completely random, they are not that fun, but the ranger has been that way through all version of D&D since AD&D 1, and people have enjoyed playing it because no DM would be so dumb as letting a player choose his preferences based on a random roll. They might not always been appropriate, but they can certainly help in the right environment (for example, there is a lot of wilderness in the published campaigns that benefit from them if properly chosen).
Don't get me wrong, I love your take on Primeval Awareness. But it is without a doubt the most permissive and GM heavy interpretation of it I've ever seen.
And it needn't be a random roll that messes up the Favored Enemy/Natural Explorer features. To get good usage out of them you need to either have them not be backstory dependent or tailor your backstory to basically be more of the same when you start adventuring. And if the GM goes for a fairly varied settings/opponents approach you will also have a lot less use for them.
It's always the problem with looking only at the technical side of things, gimping the game and its infinite possibilities while considering only POWAH !
I have played Rangers and liked them a lot but these features have always been more flavour than mechanically useful and I think that therein lies the problem.
I think that it is mainly a problem of perception, it's not that the Ranger features are underpowered but rather that they are unreliable.
You have to rely on the GM using the right sort of opponents in the right sort of places and you have to RP yourself (and the party) through travel/tracking/find food/similar situations most (or all) of the time to get any decent mileage out of them.
And that is compared to other classes features like Sneak Attack, Action Surge, Invocations, Channel Divinity, Cunning Action, Wild Shape, Meta Magic, Rage, Lay on Hands and so on and so on. Stuff that is almost always useful and close to 100% reliable, when you want to do it you just say "I do X" and it happens with just the effect that you expected every time. That difference means that for a lot of players the Ranger features will feel mostly useless a lot of the time.
Pretty sure they are talking about favorite terrain, favorite enemy, and primeval awareness. Since those features are widely regarded as largely useless except in very niche campaigns.
I even said this exact sentence in a previous comment.
Could well add the lvl 10 feature Hide in Plain Sight to the list to. Sure you get a +10 to stealth checks but it's a 1 minute lead time and you can't move or do anything so pretty much all you can do is a really slow ambush. Compare that to what other classes get at lvl 9-11 and it's a ridiculous difference.
Pretty sure they are talking about favorite terrain, favorite enemy, and primeval awareness. Since those features are widely regarded as largely useless except in very niche campaigns.
I even said this exact sentence in a previous comment.
Could well add the lvl 10 feature Hide in Plain Sight to the list to. Sure you get a +10 to stealth checks but it's a 1 minute lead time and you can't move or do anything so pretty much all you can do is a really slow ambush. Compare that to what other classes get at lvl 9-11 and it's a ridiculous difference.
Ranger really feels like it wants to play a different game than every other class doesn't it?
Pretty sure they are talking about favorite terrain, favorite enemy, and primeval awareness. Since those features are widely regarded as largely useless except in very niche campaigns.
I even said this exact sentence in a previous comment.
Could well add the lvl 10 feature Hide in Plain Sight to the list to. Sure you get a +10 to stealth checks but it's a 1 minute lead time and you can't move or do anything so pretty much all you can do is a really slow ambush. Compare that to what other classes get at lvl 9-11 and it's a ridiculous difference.
That’s a two part ability. Prep the ability. And then, later, use the ability. Powerful. Easy.
Pretty sure they are talking about favorite terrain, favorite enemy, and primeval awareness. Since those features are widely regarded as largely useless except in very niche campaigns.
I even said this exact sentence in a previous comment.
Could well add the lvl 10 feature Hide in Plain Sight to the list to. Sure you get a +10 to stealth checks but it's a 1 minute lead time and you can't move or do anything so pretty much all you can do is a really slow ambush. Compare that to what other classes get at lvl 9-11 and it's a ridiculous difference.
Ranger really feels like it wants to play a different game than every other class doesn't it?
It does. The part of the game most players ignore.
That’s a two part ability. Prep the ability. And then, later, use the ability. Powerful. Easy.
Sure if you know exactly where you need to hide and only need a one time boost. And that is if you doing a somewhat generous reading of it, a less generous reading could well be you needing to camouflage yourself in place to gain the benefit. And either way, as soon as you do anything you need to start the process over again. It's not easy or powerful, it's situational and slow. The only positive is that it doesn't cost any resources for the PC.
That’s a two part ability. Prep the ability. And then, later, use the ability. Powerful. Easy.
Sure if you know exactly where you need to hide and only need a one time boost. And that is if you doing a somewhat generous reading of it, a less generous reading could well be you needing to camouflage yourself in place to gain the benefit. And either way, as soon as you do anything you need to start the process over again. It's not easy or powerful, it's situational and slow. The only positive is that it doesn't cost any resources for the PC.
I mean, two races have weaker versions of it already. Is it generous? Why? It's two separate paragraphs, is it not? Why wouldn't it work they way it reads? "Once you are camouflaged in this way...". This is great. Yes you can't move. The Tasha variant lasts for six seconds and has zero bonus. It's only invisibility. There is one tweet from Crawford (early in the game's life and very unofficial, plus he was been wrong/corrected many times in the past and present) where he expresses it is a one part ability. That's it. Dan Dillon (now working for wizards and was a writer for Tasha's) says it's a two part ability.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Why does it always seem like the same people that say something like "that ranger ability is bad" then have the most restrictive possible interpretation possible of that ability also seem to be the same people that say something like "that (fill in what ever class ability) is amazing" and then take the most generous interpretation possible?
"Yeah. Primeval awareness could work like that, but that's not how I play it, and it sucks."
"Wizards are awesome! No. I don't bother with spell components or their gold piece costs."
"Ranger abilities are useless. No. We don't use overland travel or exploration rules. We just get to the next town or fight."
"Crossbow expert fighters do the most damage and are awesome! No. I don't track ammunition.
"Hunting and survival are pointless. No. We don't worry about encumbrance or food and water."
so, I want to question why you think darkvision you don’t choose to see 30 feet vs 60 feet?
does the eagle eye barbarian totem then have to be forced to only see things 1 mile away and everything before it?
Is there no longer the capacity to restrict how far you want to “focus” a sense?
I would like to know where this rule is stated that “up to” is always a max distance/use?
Lay on hands uses “up to” guess you now HAVE to use your entire lay on hands pool if someone is damaged more than you have lay on hands points. Because it’s up to, and “up to is fixed” so.... or are we ignoring that lay on hands is up. Or changing the definition of up to for a different ability that fits a different narrative?
I am just looking for clarification of why up to for vision, up to for primeval awareness up to for bless up to for lay on hands etc etc all mean a different up to.
Watch me on twitch
You don't have to choose. The range is fixed, and you have darkvision within the entire range. the "up to" or "within" states the maximum limit of the perception. You see the creature 30 feet away and the creature 60 feet away, both at once. What I was saying was that it is a "passive" feature; while its "on" (which is always unless you are granted it by a spell or item), you can't change the maximum range of it. All perception features work like this
They can see everything between 0 feet and 1 mile from them, unless blocked by another thing. They can't adjust this, but they get the benefit from the full range
Please tell me how you would "focus" your sight without the use of tools. You have sight. The limit is determined by outside forces, such as weather, obstructions, darkness, etc. Please tell me how you would "focus" your smell, or touch, or any other sense you have, without the use of tools (note, your hands count as tools in the case of hearing, since they are not integral to those sense organs)
The Dictionary. 5e uses common language. you can find the definition pretty easily by googling "up to".
I never said you have to use the maximum. I said you can't change what the maximum is. If you have 40 Lay on Hands points, you can't declare you now have 30, or 45. You have 40 max. It doesn't matter how many you use. Also, Lay on Hands is not a perception ability, it is an effect, and I clearly stated that non-perception effects allow you to choose how many to expend or how to focus the ability
Read my post again. "Up to", for non-perceptive abilities, means you can choose how to focus. But the "natural" understanding of perception is that "up to" only represents a fixed maximum; the limit to which you can perceive. Your perception automatically includes everything between the minimum and the maximum, as dictated by outside forces (tools, obstructions, etc), but you yourself don't have any natural control over the maximum (to raise or lower it) unless you have something else (an outside force) that would allow that. Thats not explicit in the rules, but it is how perception works in the real world, and is a valid assumption to make in adjudicating this abillity as a DM.
Obviously we would rule differently here. I prefer to use real world understandings of perception to dictate abilities that are a type of perception. that understanding says that perception is limited by outside forces, not controlled internally. If I can see, there is a limit to that perception, but I have no control over that limit without using tools, obstructions, or "turning off" the sense (by closing my eyes).
Without clear guidance on how this perceptive ability works, I have to assume it works like real perceptive senses, because that is the only reference I have.
“If you have 40 Lay on Hands points, you can't declare you now have 30, or 45.”
-but I can declare I now have 30. 30 is less than 40. It means I have used 10.
“Please tell me how you would "focus" your sight without the use of tools.”
-squinting for one
Watch me on twitch
Please tell me how, through squinting, you were able to consciously change your, lets say, 6 mile range of sight to specifically and exactly 100 feet, or 1 mile. That is the comparison being made here. Besides, this ability doesn't have an actual sense organ associated with it. And your eyelid is technically an "obstacle" to your sense organ, not the organ itself.
Also, and again, the Lay on Hands is moot to my point...its not a perception based skill. And your maximum is still 40, even if you have used some from time to time. You just have 30 left, but it's not your maximum.
Your tone, and condescending manner aside.
people who are near or far sighted. Squint to focus their vision. This is a very common thing.
you can admit you’re wrong or misspoke about stuff and no one will think less of you. People will think less of you if you talk down to everyone like they are stupid, or tell them to read dictionaries when they try to engage you in a friendly conversation. You are going on my block list, just to inform you.
Watch me on twitch
I've thought about it and I have to strongly disagree with the idea that primeval awareness is somehow tied to normal sight or whatever. This is literally a magical power. You are expending magical energy through your spell slots to "...focus your awareness on the region around you..." The major difference being that the ranger's tie to some land types improves this focus. Now let me say I stand firm that this ability is meant to work alongside all of the ranger's other abilities and spells (and beast if you're a beast master), in that a 6 mile distance is really nothing at that point. But that aside, to make a personal ruling based on your interpretation that the ranger has zero control over this focusing of controlled magic energy in their ideal environment is ludicrous. Someone can see.
I'd also like to add that tracking is limited by the environment, made easier or more difficult or even impossible by the environment. If you are out at sea, in the air, underground, blind, on a hard smooth surface, looking for creatures that are traveling by flight, hovering, swimming, or any other situation similar in that there is nothing on the ground to track, no ranger, scout rogue, druid or anything can track it normally. This is where magic can be helpful, yes. But this is also were a ranger and a level one spell slot can, at the very least, be able to get information that no one else can. And I'm sorry to bring this up, but this is also were the PHB beast mast really comes in hard. Flight, or advantage to track with sight, hearing, or SMELL is HUGE! This is literally why folks use dogs to hunt and track.
Rangers had 3 largely useless features
Do you mean feature? Singular? Or are you referring to the baseline ranger’s single feature with all of the features all of the subclasses gained at level 3? Or are you trolling the discussion? Also, useless is relative. I’m sorry you’ve had bad experiences.
Pretty sure they are talking about favorite terrain, favorite enemy, and primeval awareness. Since those features are widely regarded as largely useless except in very niche campaigns.
I even said this exact sentence in a previous comment.
Don't get me wrong, I love your take on Primeval Awareness. But it is without a doubt the most permissive and GM heavy interpretation of it I've ever seen.
And it needn't be a random roll that messes up the Favored Enemy/Natural Explorer features. To get good usage out of them you need to either have them not be backstory dependent or tailor your backstory to basically be more of the same when you start adventuring. And if the GM goes for a fairly varied settings/opponents approach you will also have a lot less use for them.
I have played Rangers and liked them a lot but these features have always been more flavour than mechanically useful and I think that therein lies the problem.
I think that it is mainly a problem of perception, it's not that the Ranger features are underpowered but rather that they are unreliable.
You have to rely on the GM using the right sort of opponents in the right sort of places and you have to RP yourself (and the party) through travel/tracking/find food/similar situations most (or all) of the time to get any decent mileage out of them.
And that is compared to other classes features like Sneak Attack, Action Surge, Invocations, Channel Divinity, Cunning Action, Wild Shape, Meta Magic, Rage, Lay on Hands and so on and so on. Stuff that is almost always useful and close to 100% reliable, when you want to do it you just say "I do X" and it happens with just the effect that you expected every time. That difference means that for a lot of players the Ranger features will feel mostly useless a lot of the time.
Could well add the lvl 10 feature Hide in Plain Sight to the list to. Sure you get a +10 to stealth checks but it's a 1 minute lead time and you can't move or do anything so pretty much all you can do is a really slow ambush. Compare that to what other classes get at lvl 9-11 and it's a ridiculous difference.
Ranger really feels like it wants to play a different game than every other class doesn't it?
Yeah, HIPS has significant issues. There's a reason TCOE includes it in the fix-list.
That’s a two part ability. Prep the ability. And then, later, use the ability. Powerful. Easy.
It does. The part of the game most players ignore.
Sure if you know exactly where you need to hide and only need a one time boost. And that is if you doing a somewhat generous reading of it, a less generous reading could well be you needing to camouflage yourself in place to gain the benefit. And either way, as soon as you do anything you need to start the process over again. It's not easy or powerful, it's situational and slow. The only positive is that it doesn't cost any resources for the PC.
I mean, two races have weaker versions of it already. Is it generous? Why? It's two separate paragraphs, is it not? Why wouldn't it work they way it reads? "Once you are camouflaged in this way...". This is great. Yes you can't move. The Tasha variant lasts for six seconds and has zero bonus. It's only invisibility. There is one tweet from Crawford (early in the game's life and very unofficial, plus he was been wrong/corrected many times in the past and present) where he expresses it is a one part ability. That's it. Dan Dillon (now working for wizards and was a writer for Tasha's) says it's a two part ability.