I just started playing 5e this year, and played a ranger.
I (mildly) regret multi-classing into fighter*, early on, as the ranger is awesome, and if you don't like the old version due to the Natural explorer / favoured enemy, which were (IMHO) the weakest elements, then thanks to Tasha, you can switch them out for something else.
* this was done for RP reasons, I'm now a Gloomstalker (5), Echo Knight (5) - it's awesome fun to play.
It is noteworthy that rangers are a weird class because most of their combat effectiveness comes from their subclass & spells, with the main class reserved for all the flavor & utility. Most martial classes are the opposite.
Favored terrain and favored enemies aren't good in most campaigns, and that's fine because Rangers can stand on their own without those features. It's definitely a little disappointing to newer players who expect a lot form the base class.
For reference, the only main fighting abilities that rangers gain from their base class are Fighting Style, Extra Attack, and Capstone. The rest are situational or utility.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
It is noteworthy that rangers are a weird class because most of their combat effectiveness comes from their subclass & spells, with the main class reserved for all the flavor & utility. Most martial classes are the opposite.
Favored terrain and favored enemies aren't good in most campaigns, and that's fine because Rangers can stand on their own without those features. It's definitely a little disappointing to newer players who expect a lot form the base class.
For reference, the only main fighting abilities that rangers gain from their base class are Fighting Style, Extra Attack, and Capstone. The rest are situational or utility.
Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer absolutely have a role to play in most campaigns. The issue is people ignoring those features because they find those parts of the game unfun. DMs have to remember that they're running the game for everyone at the table, and that means tailoring parts of the adventure to the different characters present.
Rangers do struggle a little in Tyranny of Dragons. That said, the first half (Horde of the Dragon Queen) was also published four months before the DMG; which is where all the overland exploration rules are. They do alright in Princes of the Apocalypse and Storm King's Thunder. And they're fantastic in Curse of Strahd, Out of the Abyss, and Tomb of Annihilation. The only places they really struggle are cities and dungeons, and even then they still might have languages for eavesdropping or spells to help in other ways.
Rangers get two abilities that people think are fluff. Thdy aren’t fluff. They can and should be used in situations other than “traveling in the woods”. They are knowledge skills. This isn’t a video game. I’m sure folks have the same issues with the knowledge domain cleric. Super powerful, just not “in combat”. So I suppose most people think it’s a piece of crap subclass. Rangers are useful in a city setting. In fact, many of their in combat abilities and spells shine in cramped close quarters environments. Other than fighting, in dragon heist, level 1 to 5, what does a fighter, barbarian, or paladin bring to the table? Nothing. After dragon heist we have dungeon of the mad mage which features most types of terrains and creatures from the base game. That is a ranger’s dream job. By level level 10 rangers have access to some of the best knowledge based skills in the game on multiple terrain types and monster types, and another at 14. Using these skills, this knowledge, in game takes creativity and effort. It can be done. It’s easy, just not well known or understood. If all someone does is fight like rock’em sock’em robots, counting hit points going up and down like a cat toy, then I’m sure rangers feel underpowered. But they deal as much damage as the other classes, fill unique rolls in combat others don’t, and have a skill set that a paladin and fighter don’t even begin to touch.
I haven't read the updates, but previously Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer gave only marginal, and very situational benefits. I do think combining Ranger magic with their martial abilities is underrated, though. And yeah, Beast Master was bad. Gloom Stalker is insanely good, and extremely front-loaded.
It is noteworthy that rangers are a weird class because most of their combat effectiveness comes from their subclass & spells, with the main class reserved for all the flavor & utility. Most martial classes are the opposite.
Favored terrain and favored enemies aren't good in most campaigns, and that's fine because Rangers can stand on their own without those features. It's definitely a little disappointing to newer players who expect a lot form the base class.
For reference, the only main fighting abilities that rangers gain from their base class are Fighting Style, Extra Attack, and Capstone. The rest are situational or utility.
Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer absolutely have a role to play in most campaigns. The issue is people ignoring those features because they find those parts of the game unfun. DMs have to remember that they're running the game for everyone at the table, and that means tailoring parts of the adventure to the different characters present.
Rangers do struggle a little in Tyranny of Dragons. That said, the first half (Horde of the Dragon Queen) was also published four months before the DMG; which is where all the overland exploration rules are. They do alright in Princes of the Apocalypse and Storm King's Thunder. And they're fantastic in Curse of Strahd, Out of the Abyss, and Tomb of Annihilation. The only places they really struggle are cities and dungeons, and even then they still might have languages for eavesdropping or spells to help in other ways.
This is a valid point. But really, the abilities are modest enough that they should apply to all enemies and all terrain. Maybe with slight tweaks, like obviously you shouldn't be able to learn all languages from all enemies.
I don’t get it, Internet. Do the majority of D&D tables not use any knowledge-based skills in their games? Do they never enforce anti monster stat block meta-gaming? Do they never allow monsters to escape from a battle, or not have their location known to begin with? Do they NEVER spend any time traveling FROM point A to point B? Do they always have all creatures just speak common?
I don’t get it, Internet. Do the majority of D&D tables not use any knowledge-based skills in their games? Do they never enforce anti monster stat block meta-gaming? Do they never allow monsters to escape from a battle, or not have their location known to begin with? Do they NEVER spend any time traveling FROM point A to point B? Do they always have all creatures just speak common?
Sure they do. There's just a lot of different terrain types and even more types of enemies. And then you have to dive deeper into the scenario. It's not enough that and enemy(s) escape. It has to specifically be a situation where tracking them down is warranted, and it also has be your favored enemy, and it also has to be a situation where tracking that enemy requires the Ranger's talents, verses being in a city and using things like interrogation or spy networks.
There are several terrain types. The only time it HAS to be the specific terrain is the second half of the ability while traveling overland, and that’s only if you are looking for the “auto win” effects. You still have a dexterity and wisdom based mobile archer that can talk to animals, magically create food, and is proficient in nature, survival, and perception. Anything else you’re proficient in that is wisdom or intelligence based...related to...your favored terrain via a skill check gets expertise. If your favored terrain is mountain or forest there isn’t an argument that someone can make that will convince me that a ranger couldn’t have double proficiency on a perception check, nature check, or survival check when in or about the grasslands. There is a lot of overlap there. Nature, history, or arcana about a creature type that is not a favored enemy would be made with double proficiency if that creature is native to one of your three favored terrains. If the creature type, and type is important to specify as these are VERY broad categories (fiends, aberrations, etc.), is not from your favored terrain but is a favored enemy you get as advantage to make knowledge checks about them that doesn’t even require proficiency in a skill! So you bet a mathematical +5 to know or remember information about all undead or all beasts. A ranger is already good at tracking via a simple survival proficiency. Anyone can be. Rangers supplement that with spells, favored terrains and favored enemies. It’s not like they can’t do anything of it’s not their favored enemy or favored terrain. Quite the opposite. Related to the favored terrain or any knowledge check about a broad creature type, these are very large effects, not pinpoint restrictions. Even hunter’s mark has a tracking buff. They have SO MUCH more than just double proficiency in nature and survival for tracking. They can do really well in a city. If the table is RAW and doesn’t allow a ranger to take “urban” as a favored terrain (which everyone should try sometime as it is awesome sauce), they still can track via survival. They still have wisdom as a main stat. They likely have a decent intelligence. They have multiple spells that allow them to communicate with and through the eyes and ears of animals like rats, cats, and birds. Many of their spells deal with slowing or stopping an enemy, slowing or dealing damage to multiple enemies at once, and all of that BENEFIT from the confined spaces in a city via rooms, alleyways, and streets. They have spells that allow the entire party to not be seen or heard. They have have the ability to hide in plain sight using nothing but the stuff around them. Nothing I’ve mentioned would use more than the skills or known spells allowed to them by the way.
There are several terrain types. The only time it HAS to be the specific terrain is the second half of the ability while traveling overland, and that’s only if you are looking for the “auto win” effects. You still have a dexterity and wisdom based mobile archer that can talk to animals, magically create food, and is proficient in nature, survival, and perception. Anything else you’re proficient in that is wisdom or intelligence based...related to...your favored terrain via a skill check gets expertise. If your favored terrain is mountain or forest there isn’t an argument that someone can make that will convince me that a ranger couldn’t have double proficiency on a perception check, nature check, or survival check when in or about the grasslands. There is a lot of overlap there. Nature, history, or arcana about a creature type that is not a favored enemy would be made with double proficiency if that creature is native to one of your three favored terrains. If the creature type, and type is important to specify as these are VERY broad categories (fiends, aberrations, etc.), is not from your favored terrain but is a favored enemy you get as advantage to make knowledge checks about them that doesn’t even require proficiency in a skill! So you bet a mathematical +5 to know or remember information about all undead or all beasts. A ranger is already good at tracking via a simple survival proficiency. Anyone can be. Rangers supplement that with spells, favored terrains and favored enemies. It’s not like they can’t do anything of it’s not their favored enemy or favored terrain. Quite the opposite. Related to the favored terrain or any knowledge check about a broad creature type, these are very large effects, not pinpoint restrictions. Even hunter’s mark has a tracking buff. They have SO MUCH more than just double proficiency in nature and survival for tracking. They can do really well in a city. If the table is RAW and doesn’t allow a ranger to take “urban” as a favored terrain (which everyone should try sometime as it is awesome sauce), they still can track via survival. They still have wisdom as a main stat. They likely have a decent intelligence. They have multiple spells that allow them to communicate with and through the eyes and ears of animals like rats, cats, and birds. Many of their spells deal with slowing or stopping an enemy, slowing or dealing damage to multiple enemies at once, and all of that BENEFIT from the confined spaces in a city via rooms, alleyways, and streets. They have spells that allow the entire party to not be seen or heard. They have have the ability to hide in plain sight using nothing but the stuff around them. Nothing I’ve mentioned would use more than the skills or known spells allowed to them by the way.
I'm specifically referring to Natural Explorer in the PHB. All the abilities pertain to a specific terrain.
You are particularly familiar with one type of natural environment and are adept at traveling and surviving in such regions. Choose one type of favored terrain: arctic, coast, desert, forest, grassland, mountain, swamp, or the Underdark. When you make an Intelligence or Wisdom check related to your favored terrain, your proficiency bonus is doubled if you are using a skill that you’re proficient in.
While traveling for an hour or more in your favored terrain, you gain the following benefits:
Difficult terrain doesn’t slow your group’s travel.
Your group can’t become lost except by magical means.
Even when you are engaged in another activity while traveling (such as foraging, navigating, or tracking), you remain alert to danger.
If you are traveling alone, you can move stealthily at a normal pace.
When you forage, you find twice as much food as you normally would.
While tracking other creatures, you also learn their exact number, their sizes, and how long ago they passed through the area.
You choose additional favored terrain types at 6th and 10th level.
All of these apply to a specific terrain. Many of have never come up in any of my campaigns, ever. How often are we foraging for food, and the DM has us roll for how much? Lost in the woods - what percent of game sessions does that ever happen? Probably the most common one is tracking creatures, and even that is somewhat situational. If they applied to ALL natural terrain, then I would call it a decent subclass ability - but nothing I would get excited about.
Only the second half of the ability require you to be IN your favored terrain. The first half of the ability allows you to make proficient skill checks with a buff if the information in question is simply related to your favored terrain. Plants in a shop or kitchen found in your favored terrain. A painting of your favored terrain. Creatures (including monsters) from your native terrain. Historical events, natural occurrences, or lore in, from, or about your favored terrain. Things that overlap from your favored terrain that also are found in another terrain that isn't your favored, like survival and nature skills can apply. Tracking would be an overlapping skill. Hunting would overlap. Animal handling would overlap.
The ability doesn't spell out every possible situation for the first half of the ability like it does for the second half. There are hundreds of possible scenarios for the first half. This is bad for players that want everything spelled out for them or for things like video games. But for a game like D&D, the sky is the limit for this ability.
A real life forest ranger (favored terrain forest) would half all kinds of skills and information (animal handling, nature, survival) that would be transferable if they found themself in a coastal, grassland, or mountainous terrain. If you can track or survive in the wild there's more situations that would overlap than less. Desert survival or underdark would probably not overlap much. Animal handling wouldn't overlap much in the underdark. Perception would overlap quite a lot. Animal handling would overlap a lot. Nature would overlap more often than not.
I'm not really following which parts of Favored Terrain you're referring to. I posted the entire ability, all the text. Can you specify which ones you're referring to?
Edit: Nevermind, I think you're talking about getting expertise related to favored terrain. Again, that is very situational. You can provide that, PLUS make all the bullet point abilities apply to all terrain, and it would not even come close to breaking the game. As it sits, it's just way too situational unless the DM is specifically trying to cater to your abilities. And that would be laudable on his or her part, but an ability should not depend on the DM.
Natural Explorer
You are particularly familiar with one type of natural environment and are adept at traveling and surviving in such regions. Choose one type of favored terrain: arctic, coast, desert, forest, grassland, mountain, swamp, or the Underdark. When you make an Intelligence or Wisdom check related to your favored terrain, your proficiency bonus is doubled if you are using a skill that you’re proficient in.
While traveling for an hour or more in your favored terrain, you gain the following benefits:
Difficult terrain doesn’t slow your group’s travel.
Your group can’t become lost except by magical means.
Even when you are engaged in another activity while traveling (such as foraging, navigating, or tracking), you remain alert to danger.
If you are traveling alone, you can move stealthily at a normal pace.
When you forage, you find twice as much food as you normally would.
While tracking other creatures, you also learn their exact number, their sizes, and how long ago they passed through the area.
You choose additional favored terrain types at 6th and 10th level.
The DM's job is to cater to the abilities of the players; to tailor the campaign so that everyone has something to do. The point behind those choices is to make the choices meaningful. A party can explore the wilderness just fine without a ranger with that feature. They just happen to make them better if they do have them.
The game has three pillars. Saying something is situational, as if it's some kind of bad mark, is foolish. Everything is situational, from Extra Attack to spells known/prepared.
It's a level 1 ability. I don't think it's supposed to be game breaking. Thieves cant, druidic, proficiency in the history or religion skills, an extra language, 10ish temporary hit points once per rest, jack of all trades, unarmored defense, divine sense, proficiency in heavy armor, all of these are first level abilities that don't break the game, and I would say that favored enemy and natural explorer are way better than any of them. Yes, the second half of the natural explorer requires you to be in your favored terrain to get those benefits. Of the published adventures only a couple feature more than 2 or 3 different types of natural terrains, and several of them only feature 1 type of terrain! The ranger is still going to focus on abilities and proficiencies that work well for travel and survival in the wild. Dexterity, archery, wisdom. And then their spellcasting adds to that with speak with animals, goodberry, fog cloud, hunter's mark, pass without trace, beast sense, and those are just in the PHB. The double proficiency bonus part of the ability has NOTHING to do with being in or even near your favored terrain. Anything (proficient wisdom and intelligence based skills) having to do with anything related to any of your favored terrains gets the bonus. Most games don't make it past level 14. You have 3 favored terrains by level 10, and 3 groups of favored creatures by level 14. That's a lot. By this point all a barbarian can do is rage more, all a fighter can do is hit more, and all a paladin can do is smite and lay on hands more.
It's a level 1 ability. I don't think it's supposed to be game breaking. Thieves cant, druidic, proficiency in the history or religion skills, an extra language, 10ish temporary hit points once per rest, jack of all trades, unarmored defense, divine sense, proficiency in heavy armor, all of these are first level abilities that don't break the game, and I would say that favored enemy and natural explorer are way better than any of them. Yes, the second half of the natural explorer requires you to be in your favored terrain to get those benefits. Of the published adventures only a couple feature more than 2 or 3 different types of natural terrains, and several of them only feature 1 type of terrain! The ranger is still going to focus on abilities and proficiencies that work well for travel and survival in the wild. Dexterity, archery, wisdom. And then their spellcasting adds to that with speak with animals, goodberry, fog cloud, hunter's mark, pass without trace, beast sense, and those are just in the PHB. The double proficiency bonus part of the ability has NOTHING to do with being in or even near your favored terrain. Anything (proficient wisdom and intelligence based skills) having to do with anything related to any of your favored terrains gets the bonus. Most games don't make it past level 14. You have 3 favored terrains by level 10, and 3 groups of favored creatures by level 14. That's a lot. By this point all a barbarian can do is rage more, all a fighter can do is hit more, and all a paladin can do is smite and lay on hands more.
I agree at 1st level ability should not break the game, and that's why I said if they apply to all terrain, it wouldn't. I've played a Ranger a few times because I love Gloomstalker. I actively looked for opportunity to use the abilities, and they almost never came up. Even when traveling in favored terrain, it would not up. We travel from A to B, and perhaps some encounters happen, but travel time is a non-issue. The group never gets lost, regardless of what terrain we're in. Perception checks while engaging in an activity never comes up. I never traveled alone, and travel speed isn't normally impactful on the game. How often does anyone really forage for food in their games? Tracking creatures and learning their number, that situation came up once that I can remember. And that knowledge wasn't really impactful.
I've had some good DM's, but perhaps they didn't focus enough on trying create scenarios that cater to my skill set. But if I'm writing abilities for a class or subclass, I'm going to try to make it as non DM-dependent as I can. The bullet point abilities are already situational enough, that they don't need to be severely restricted by applying to only one terrain.
I understand that most DMs or groups don't use the entire rules of the game. That's fine. It's not the ranger's fault. They aren't poorly designed for the game of D&D 5E, they are "poorly designed" for a type of game most people play. Languages are useless if a DM or group have everyone just understand everyone all of the time. Expertise in thieves' tools are useless if you never find a locked door or chest. If your DM loves flying creatures for enemies then your paladin and barbarian are going to be really weak compared to being able to fight in melee. Fireball is not as powerful is the DM never puts more than one big enemy on the battlefield. Smite and action surge is not as powerful is the DM only ever puts lots of little enemies on the battlefield. PCs with a focus on healing magic aren't as useful if the party gets to rest whenever they want.
Ok, we need to stop talking like it's impossible to track anything or to get anywhere without Natural Explorer. I do these things in my games. With my Scout Rogue or my Wizard, whose abilities allow me to do these things well.
This is the ultimate problem. Many builds can do these things. The difference is that the other builds also have a full suite of abilities and/or features keyed to the other pillars of the game. That's all we want for Ranger. If you want it to be Exploration the Class, ok. Then let's get rid of the ridiculous restrictions and actually make them better at exploration than anyone else in the majority of circumstances. Because right now they're just not. Other classes can do it and then some.
I don’t think the scout rogue is even a big deal. I mean, they get expertise in survival and nature. Any rogue can do that. Any bard can do that! Rangers kind of get that, some would argue almost never, while I find most of the time. RangerS do NOT have to be IN a favored terrain to get all of their abilities. And what ranger’s do get no other class can do, even with the outlander background. What ranger’s get from natural explorer in and out of their favored terrains, 3 of them by the way, is WAY more than expertise in 2 skills. So the argument is you’re going to devote your background and subclass to being a boy scout.
What ranger’s offer different from any other martial class is flexibility, AoE damage, survival, and the ability to blend in with any party makeup. Other martial classes ha e pretty well defined, or at least tried and true roles in combat and outside of combat. The ranger’s spell list ALONE sets it apart from all the other martial character classes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I just started playing 5e this year, and played a ranger.
I (mildly) regret multi-classing into fighter*, early on, as the ranger is awesome, and if you don't like the old version due to the Natural explorer / favoured enemy, which were (IMHO) the weakest elements, then thanks to Tasha, you can switch them out for something else.
* this was done for RP reasons, I'm now a Gloomstalker (5), Echo Knight (5) - it's awesome fun to play.
Rangers rock :)
It is noteworthy that rangers are a weird class because most of their combat effectiveness comes from their subclass & spells, with the main class reserved for all the flavor & utility. Most martial classes are the opposite.
Favored terrain and favored enemies aren't good in most campaigns, and that's fine because Rangers can stand on their own without those features. It's definitely a little disappointing to newer players who expect a lot form the base class.
For reference, the only main fighting abilities that rangers gain from their base class are Fighting Style, Extra Attack, and Capstone. The rest are situational or utility.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer absolutely have a role to play in most campaigns. The issue is people ignoring those features because they find those parts of the game unfun. DMs have to remember that they're running the game for everyone at the table, and that means tailoring parts of the adventure to the different characters present.
Rangers do struggle a little in Tyranny of Dragons. That said, the first half (Horde of the Dragon Queen) was also published four months before the DMG; which is where all the overland exploration rules are. They do alright in Princes of the Apocalypse and Storm King's Thunder. And they're fantastic in Curse of Strahd, Out of the Abyss, and Tomb of Annihilation. The only places they really struggle are cities and dungeons, and even then they still might have languages for eavesdropping or spells to help in other ways.
I haven't read the updates, but previously Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer gave only marginal, and very situational benefits. I do think combining Ranger magic with their martial abilities is underrated, though. And yeah, Beast Master was bad. Gloom Stalker is insanely good, and extremely front-loaded.
This is a valid point. But really, the abilities are modest enough that they should apply to all enemies and all terrain. Maybe with slight tweaks, like obviously you shouldn't be able to learn all languages from all enemies.
I don’t get it, Internet. Do the majority of D&D tables not use any knowledge-based skills in their games? Do they never enforce anti monster stat block meta-gaming? Do they never allow monsters to escape from a battle, or not have their location known to begin with? Do they NEVER spend any time traveling FROM point A to point B? Do they always have all creatures just speak common?
Sure they do. There's just a lot of different terrain types and even more types of enemies. And then you have to dive deeper into the scenario. It's not enough that and enemy(s) escape. It has to specifically be a situation where tracking them down is warranted, and it also has be your favored enemy, and it also has to be a situation where tracking that enemy requires the Ranger's talents, verses being in a city and using things like interrogation or spy networks.
There are several terrain types. The only time it HAS to be the specific terrain is the second half of the ability while traveling overland, and that’s only if you are looking for the “auto win” effects. You still have a dexterity and wisdom based mobile archer that can talk to animals, magically create food, and is proficient in nature, survival, and perception. Anything else you’re proficient in that is wisdom or intelligence based...related to...your favored terrain via a skill check gets expertise. If your favored terrain is mountain or forest there isn’t an argument that someone can make that will convince me that a ranger couldn’t have double proficiency on a perception check, nature check, or survival check when in or about the grasslands. There is a lot of overlap there. Nature, history, or arcana about a creature type that is not a favored enemy would be made with double proficiency if that creature is native to one of your three favored terrains. If the creature type, and type is important to specify as these are VERY broad categories (fiends, aberrations, etc.), is not from your favored terrain but is a favored enemy you get as advantage to make knowledge checks about them that doesn’t even require proficiency in a skill! So you bet a mathematical +5 to know or remember information about all undead or all beasts. A ranger is already good at tracking via a simple survival proficiency. Anyone can be. Rangers supplement that with spells, favored terrains and favored enemies. It’s not like they can’t do anything of it’s not their favored enemy or favored terrain. Quite the opposite. Related to the favored terrain or any knowledge check about a broad creature type, these are very large effects, not pinpoint restrictions. Even hunter’s mark has a tracking buff. They have SO MUCH more than just double proficiency in nature and survival for tracking. They can do really well in a city. If the table is RAW and doesn’t allow a ranger to take “urban” as a favored terrain (which everyone should try sometime as it is awesome sauce), they still can track via survival. They still have wisdom as a main stat. They likely have a decent intelligence. They have multiple spells that allow them to communicate with and through the eyes and ears of animals like rats, cats, and birds. Many of their spells deal with slowing or stopping an enemy, slowing or dealing damage to multiple enemies at once, and all of that BENEFIT from the confined spaces in a city via rooms, alleyways, and streets. They have spells that allow the entire party to not be seen or heard. They have have the ability to hide in plain sight using nothing but the stuff around them. Nothing I’ve mentioned would use more than the skills or known spells allowed to them by the way.
I'm specifically referring to Natural Explorer in the PHB. All the abilities pertain to a specific terrain.
All of these apply to a specific terrain. Many of have never come up in any of my campaigns, ever. How often are we foraging for food, and the DM has us roll for how much? Lost in the woods - what percent of game sessions does that ever happen? Probably the most common one is tracking creatures, and even that is somewhat situational. If they applied to ALL natural terrain, then I would call it a decent subclass ability - but nothing I would get excited about.
Only the second half of the ability require you to be IN your favored terrain. The first half of the ability allows you to make proficient skill checks with a buff if the information in question is simply related to your favored terrain. Plants in a shop or kitchen found in your favored terrain. A painting of your favored terrain. Creatures (including monsters) from your native terrain. Historical events, natural occurrences, or lore in, from, or about your favored terrain. Things that overlap from your favored terrain that also are found in another terrain that isn't your favored, like survival and nature skills can apply. Tracking would be an overlapping skill. Hunting would overlap. Animal handling would overlap.
The ability doesn't spell out every possible situation for the first half of the ability like it does for the second half. There are hundreds of possible scenarios for the first half. This is bad for players that want everything spelled out for them or for things like video games. But for a game like D&D, the sky is the limit for this ability.
A real life forest ranger (favored terrain forest) would half all kinds of skills and information (animal handling, nature, survival) that would be transferable if they found themself in a coastal, grassland, or mountainous terrain. If you can track or survive in the wild there's more situations that would overlap than less. Desert survival or underdark would probably not overlap much. Animal handling wouldn't overlap much in the underdark. Perception would overlap quite a lot. Animal handling would overlap a lot. Nature would overlap more often than not.
I'm not really following which parts of Favored Terrain you're referring to. I posted the entire ability, all the text. Can you specify which ones you're referring to?
Edit: Nevermind, I think you're talking about getting expertise related to favored terrain. Again, that is very situational. You can provide that, PLUS make all the bullet point abilities apply to all terrain, and it would not even come close to breaking the game. As it sits, it's just way too situational unless the DM is specifically trying to cater to your abilities. And that would be laudable on his or her part, but an ability should not depend on the DM.
The DM's job is to cater to the abilities of the players; to tailor the campaign so that everyone has something to do. The point behind those choices is to make the choices meaningful. A party can explore the wilderness just fine without a ranger with that feature. They just happen to make them better if they do have them.
The game has three pillars. Saying something is situational, as if it's some kind of bad mark, is foolish. Everything is situational, from Extra Attack to spells known/prepared.
It's a level 1 ability. I don't think it's supposed to be game breaking. Thieves cant, druidic, proficiency in the history or religion skills, an extra language, 10ish temporary hit points once per rest, jack of all trades, unarmored defense, divine sense, proficiency in heavy armor, all of these are first level abilities that don't break the game, and I would say that favored enemy and natural explorer are way better than any of them. Yes, the second half of the natural explorer requires you to be in your favored terrain to get those benefits. Of the published adventures only a couple feature more than 2 or 3 different types of natural terrains, and several of them only feature 1 type of terrain! The ranger is still going to focus on abilities and proficiencies that work well for travel and survival in the wild. Dexterity, archery, wisdom. And then their spellcasting adds to that with speak with animals, goodberry, fog cloud, hunter's mark, pass without trace, beast sense, and those are just in the PHB. The double proficiency bonus part of the ability has NOTHING to do with being in or even near your favored terrain. Anything (proficient wisdom and intelligence based skills) having to do with anything related to any of your favored terrains gets the bonus. Most games don't make it past level 14. You have 3 favored terrains by level 10, and 3 groups of favored creatures by level 14. That's a lot. By this point all a barbarian can do is rage more, all a fighter can do is hit more, and all a paladin can do is smite and lay on hands more.
I agree at 1st level ability should not break the game, and that's why I said if they apply to all terrain, it wouldn't. I've played a Ranger a few times because I love Gloomstalker. I actively looked for opportunity to use the abilities, and they almost never came up. Even when traveling in favored terrain, it would not up. We travel from A to B, and perhaps some encounters happen, but travel time is a non-issue. The group never gets lost, regardless of what terrain we're in. Perception checks while engaging in an activity never comes up. I never traveled alone, and travel speed isn't normally impactful on the game. How often does anyone really forage for food in their games? Tracking creatures and learning their number, that situation came up once that I can remember. And that knowledge wasn't really impactful.
I've had some good DM's, but perhaps they didn't focus enough on trying create scenarios that cater to my skill set. But if I'm writing abilities for a class or subclass, I'm going to try to make it as non DM-dependent as I can. The bullet point abilities are already situational enough, that they don't need to be severely restricted by applying to only one terrain.
I understand that most DMs or groups don't use the entire rules of the game. That's fine. It's not the ranger's fault. They aren't poorly designed for the game of D&D 5E, they are "poorly designed" for a type of game most people play. Languages are useless if a DM or group have everyone just understand everyone all of the time. Expertise in thieves' tools are useless if you never find a locked door or chest. If your DM loves flying creatures for enemies then your paladin and barbarian are going to be really weak compared to being able to fight in melee. Fireball is not as powerful is the DM never puts more than one big enemy on the battlefield. Smite and action surge is not as powerful is the DM only ever puts lots of little enemies on the battlefield. PCs with a focus on healing magic aren't as useful if the party gets to rest whenever they want.
Ok, we need to stop talking like it's impossible to track anything or to get anywhere without Natural Explorer. I do these things in my games. With my Scout Rogue or my Wizard, whose abilities allow me to do these things well.
This is the ultimate problem. Many builds can do these things. The difference is that the other builds also have a full suite of abilities and/or features keyed to the other pillars of the game. That's all we want for Ranger. If you want it to be Exploration the Class, ok. Then let's get rid of the ridiculous restrictions and actually make them better at exploration than anyone else in the majority of circumstances. Because right now they're just not. Other classes can do it and then some.
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 don’t think the scout rogue is even a big deal. I mean, they get expertise in survival and nature. Any rogue can do that. Any bard can do that! Rangers kind of get that, some would argue almost never, while I find most of the time. RangerS do NOT have to be IN a favored terrain to get all of their abilities. And what ranger’s do get no other class can do, even with the outlander background. What ranger’s get from natural explorer in and out of their favored terrains, 3 of them by the way, is WAY more than expertise in 2 skills. So the argument is you’re going to devote your background and subclass to being a boy scout.
What ranger’s offer different from any other martial class is flexibility, AoE damage, survival, and the ability to blend in with any party makeup. Other martial classes ha e pretty well defined, or at least tried and true roles in combat and outside of combat. The ranger’s spell list ALONE sets it apart from all the other martial character classes.