The supernova build I helped brew in a thread that easily does 300+ average damage round 1 without magic items (500+ average damage with) and 100+ average damage on subsequent rounds is only possible because of the gloom stalker's dread ambush and Hunter's mark.
A barbarian, fighter, or paladin can do anything a ranger could, better, in melee and are far more versatile and powerful classes.
If you want to be the ranger try to convince your DM to let you be the revised ranger from unearthed arcana. The revised ranger is on par with everyone else. If your DM is reluctant, tell them even Wizards acknowledges the ranger is underpowered, and this is the attempt to correct that. They (Wizards) literally preface the revised ranger by explaining that, before getting into the updated mechanics.
One of my friends played a melee ranger in our last game - I believe he went with the Hunter archetype, and he used two whips as his primary weapons. (He was strongly inspired by Trevor Belmont from Castlevania.) My friend is a consummate min-maxer so he was able to get some grody damage output even with the less-than-optimal weapon choice.
+1 Rep for using "Grody"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
The thing to watch out for w/ a melee Ranger build is not to spread out your stats too thinly. Because DEX and WIS are your main stats, your multi-class would best be one that can work well with emphasizing those stats as well. Also, you need to watch out for disruption of Concentration, which can kill a lot of the more combat-oriented spell goodies that Rangers have access to. For that reason, you likely want to rely as little on concentration spells as possible through multi-classing with Rogue or Fighter or start with Fighter 1 before going Ranger b/c starting as Fighter nets you a CON save proficiency right off plus a fighting style.
As others have said, there are viable melee Ranger sub-classes. The issue is that you need to build one carefully b/c Rangers are more fragile than Paladins or Barbarians and are more reliant on spells than Fighters or Rogues.
Also, Horizon Walker can be pretty strong melee with the right feats. Force damage is always competitive and being able to *BAMF* up to someone and freeze tag them is very useful in many fights.
Short answer is yes in my opinion. The key is to get damage out of your bonus action. The most common way for that is to dual wield, but Ranger can get bonus action damage in several ways. Hunter's Mark is one way. It frees up the bonus action after one turn unless you have to recast, but it also takes a spell slot. If you have the Dragonmark Finding you get one free cast per long rest. Hunter can get extra damage on a single or an additional attack on another target, again without the bonus action. Horizon Walker can use the bonus action for an additional D8 damage and changing damage to force. If you aren't going dual wield then Dueling with the +2 damage is statistically a nice boost.
I don't feel like Rangers are playing catch up in the damage department. They can deal consistent multi-dice damage each turn in melee or at range. If you give the highest tier damage monkies an A grade, then rangers are easily a solid B, and they are also a B as a meat shield which the damage monkies typically aren't.
Here’s an idea - Shortsword, Half Plate and Shield. Max out your Dex the best you can. Wisdom won’t be that important. Go Hunter. Get Defense Fighting Style. Take Medium Armor Master and Shield Master.
Non-magical AC is 21.
For your Ranger archetype choices: Horde Breaker, Multi attack Defense, Uncanny Dodge.
This is a good economy of actions - if you get hit, you can use Uncanny to halve the damage. And then you get +4 AC on all the remaining attacks (25 AC). That’s a hefty boost and incredibly efficient.
Horde Breaker gets you an extra attack, but you still need a bonus action. That’s why you pick up Shield Master Feat - an extra Shove action to control the battlefield and get some spell defenses.
Best of all? No one will think a Ranger can handle the front lines but you’ll be an absolute juggernaut against the big beasts (especially the ones with Multiattack).
Level 1 spell - Ensnaring Strike. Keep the battlefield locked down. Bonus? Ensnaring Strike at the end of your first turn... hit melee the round after and shield bash to knock them down or away. Great synergy!
Could you build a fighter that RPs as a ranger? Or do you need to have some ability specific to the ranger class to achieve the build you want? If you need a specific ability, could a magic ring or other device provide you with that one ability?
I would imagine a fighter build using a half-elf could be made to be very much like a ranger and RP in that manner.
Pure classed Melee rangers do comparable damage to barbarians: you're losing the (quite small, really) flat bonus damage that rage provides, but picking up Hunters Mark which should almost always be up, which comes out about the same. In exchange, you're less MAD than a Barbarian, and far more versatile using spells. At very high levels, a melee Ranger's spells can spike their damage quite high indeed with Steel Wind Strike, but in the meantime Hunter's Mark with two or three attacks per round leaves you on decent enough footing when compared against barbarians and fighters on non-action surge rounds.
I'm currently playing a 7/3 Horizon Walker Ranger/Order of the Mutant Blood hunter in one of my games. My main weapon is a flametongue greatsword. I have no issue keeping up with the damage output of the Paladin in my group. I'm a little behind the other ranger in the group, but that's because he has a ridiculously strong bow that was gifted to him and is also a rogue.
Admittedly, I am a little squishy because I'm using a greatsword and my DM consistently rolls high, but I have tons of fun with the character. Making a target take 4d6+d8+d4 force damage on a single hit is pretty fun, lol. (Horizon walker bonus action turns all damage to force, 4d6 from FLGS, D8 from the bonus action, d4 from blood hunter.)
Pure classed Melee rangers do comparable damage to barbarians: you're losing the (quite small, really) flat bonus damage that rage provides, but picking up Hunters Mark which should almost always be up, which comes out about the same. In exchange, you're less MAD than a Barbarian, and far more versatile using spells. At very high levels, a melee Ranger's spells can spike their damage quite high indeed with Steel Wind Strike, but in the meantime Hunter's Mark with two or three attacks per round leaves you on decent enough footing when compared against barbarians and fighters on non-action surge rounds.
I'd counter that Ranger is no more or less MAD than Barbarian. Ranger is going for Dex for melee damage, will want Con for taking hits if in Melee, and some degree of Wisdom- say 13. If going strength based, probably exactly like the Barbarian, who will want Strength for melee damage, con for taking hits and 14 dex for medium armor. At best you're going one off on standard array and taking two dump stats to 8 in point buy for barb.
Barbarians are one of the MADest classes in 5E, since you need three good stats for combat (Strength to attack, Dex AND Con for armor), even before considering the possibility that you might want to have a mediumish wisdom to track/spot stuff or roleplay. A ranger only needs to max Dexterity to be effective in combat, and is honestly more interested in Wisdom for skills than spell saves since they focus on self buffing and utility spells.
Barbarians are one of the MADest classes in 5E, since you need three good stats for combat (Strength to attack, Dex AND Con for armor), even before considering the possibility that you might want to have a mediumish wisdom to track/spot stuff or roleplay. A ranger only needs to max Dexterity to be effective in combat, and is honestly more interested in Wisdom for skills than spell saves since they focus on self buffing and utility spells.
Depending on your build. If you are going array, you need to put a 15, 14, and 13 somewhere. Strength at 15, con at 13, and dex at 14 (plus wis at 12) gives you reasonable stats without considering racial bonuses. You use medium armor and your dex never needs to move. If you want feats, to use unarmored defense, or any number of other things sure it gets more MAD. But the same things can be said for Ranger, particularly if you go strength build, which would be similar to the barbarian build I mentioned above. Barb is one of the classes that forces you to seek out a defense stat separate from your melee damage stat, since you can't go heavy armor and use rage and use a dex build limits your rage bonus. The exception being a Loxodon barbarian, which would be behind on damage.
If you want to go archery ranger, you can simplify quite a bit, and finesse melee ranger can focus on dex and con to the exclusion of everything else. But the blanket statement that Barb is more MAD than ranger isn't true.
Barb is one of the classes that forces you to seek out a defense stat separate from your melee damage stat, since you can't go heavy armor and use rage and use a dex build limits your rage bonus. ... finesse melee ranger can focus on dex and con to the exclusion of everything else. But the blanket statement that Barb is more MAD than ranger isn't true.
I feel like I just read 1+1 = 5.
A ranger (whether ranged or melee-finesse) need only max out Dexterity to hit 18 AC and full attack progression, and can safely tank Strength, Constitution, Intelligence, and Charisma, requiring only a middling Wisdom to keep multiclass open as an option or cast a save-based spell once in a while. A Barbarian instead needs to max out their strength, AND have a middling or high dexterity to hit the same 18 AC in armor, or high dexterity AND constitution to hit 18 AC out of armor.
It's not that it isn't doable, I'm just saying that a ranger relies on only one stat in combat (Dexterity), while a barbarian relies on three stats (Strength, Dexterity, Constitution) to achieve similar levels of combat effectiveness. That is the definition of MAD. A pure-classed ranger is very likely to have room to take feats. A pure-classed barbarian is going to be chasing ASI its entire career.
All of which is to say... yes, melee rangers are viable, and flexible, and don't require amazing stat rolls.
How would you build a Glasya Tiefling Ranger for melee using point buy?
I'm assuming because Ranger has a lot of Bonus Action spells that dual wielding probably isn't the best idea? But then using a Two-Handed weapon would require too much strength. Suppose Rapier and Shield is always an option.
Could you build a fighter that RPs as a ranger? Or do you need to have some ability specific to the ranger class to achieve the build you want? If you need a specific ability, could a magic ring or other device provide you with that one ability?
I would imagine a fighter build using a half-elf could be made to be very much like a ranger and RP in that manner.
I'm a bit late stumbling into this response. My apologies.
I am of the mind that a class is a mechanic - a set of rules to play by with common identifiers to ... identify which rules are being used - and roleplay is independent of that. A Monk who's a pirate "Brawler"? Sure. Why not? Who's to say that a character with all the Monk abilities has to be monastic? Some may consider that "homebrew", but I consider it roleplay since only the names change, not the rules.
So... a Fighter class who identifies as a Ranger in roleplay would be fine by me (if it were me, and it's probably not).
EDIT: But I do think that the spirit of this thread is more on making a Ranger class character as a melee character (possibly identifying as a Fighter in roleplay while actually being a Ranger class in rules).
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
Barb is one of the classes that forces you to seek out a defense stat separate from your melee damage stat, since you can't go heavy armor and use rage and use a dex build limits your rage bonus. ... finesse melee ranger can focus on dex and con to the exclusion of everything else. But the blanket statement that Barb is more MAD than ranger isn't true.
I feel like I just read 1+1 = 5.
A ranger (whether ranged or melee-finesse) need only max out Dexterity to hit 18 AC and full attack progression, and can safely tank Strength, Constitution, Intelligence, and Charisma, requiring only a middling Wisdom to keep multiclass open as an option or cast a save-based spell once in a while. A Barbarian instead needs to max out their strength, AND have a middling or high dexterity to hit the same 18 AC in armor, or high dexterity AND constitution to hit 18 AC out of armor.
It's not that it isn't doable, I'm just saying that a ranger relies on only one stat in combat (Dexterity), while a barbarian relies on three stats (Strength, Dexterity, Constitution) to achieve similar levels of combat effectiveness. That is the definition of MAD. A pure-classed ranger is very likely to have room to take feats. A pure-classed barbarian is going to be chasing ASI its entire career.
All of which is to say... yes, melee rangers are viable, and flexible, and don't require amazing stat rolls.
If you are talking about a melee ranger dumping Constitution, and getting 18 AC with just max dex then I'll assume you're talking studded leather armor and defense fighting style with the +5 from dex. 12+5+1=18. Any other fighting style and you're 17. The barb can't get the fighting style without multiclass, but can get 15+2=17 from wearing half plate and a 14 dex. The barb could then max strength and be just as effective as your ranger if in different ways. Unarmored defense is not needed and constitution is just as unnecessary as it is for your melee ranger. Rage also gives resistance to piercing, bludgeoning, and slashing damage and barbearian gets more. It's not always on like defense style but rage is also a default option. Half plate works fine with rage since it's not heavy armor. Plus barb has access to bigger die weapons and bigger hit die. Ranger does have Hunter's Mark to help offset the larger damage die, but it's on about as much as Rage and requires concentration.
All in all, I'd say it's a wash since the middling dex requirement for the barb AC can be obtained with a 12 or 13 plus a racial bonus, let alone the 14 from standard array. It does limit your other options, but it doesn't force you to chase ASIs anymore than a melee Ranger would have to do. Both would still need two full ASIs to max their attack stat and then could chase feats if they wanted to.
Melee Rangers in the first tier of play is going to out damage most other melee classes if you avoid beastmaster. Hunter, in any of its options, does excellent damage, if you're running up on a creature with a longsword (let's say) you're doing 1D8 for the sword, 1d8 for Colossus Slayer (let's say) and 1d6 for Hunter's mark, that's more then any other melee class can do in 1 attack except for a Paladin burning smites. Gloomstalker's do great damage in the 1st rounds of combat with their Ambush ability and that extra attack they get in round 1.
The problem with rangers is that their damage abilities do not scale as well as the other Martial classes outside of the first 5 levels while other classes their damage increases steadily. In the first 10 levels (which is what most players play) the Barbarian will out damage the other martial classes on average damage with Paladin's having the most burst damage potential. A Ranger really will benefit from taking 2 levels of Fighter for Action Surge or depending on how you rolled for stats (if you roll) taking a few levels of Paladin would help as well for Smite spells and Divine Smite. If you don't multi-class or your DM does not do multi-classing, then your Ranger can do good damage but if you're looking to rock everyone's world and be the groups primary Damage dealer, you probably will feel like you fall short.
But all the other cool things Rangers get make up for it in the Exploration part of D&D and what class you play means little for RP.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The supernova build I helped brew in a thread that easily does 300+ average damage round 1 without magic items (500+ average damage with) and 100+ average damage on subsequent rounds is only possible because of the gloom stalker's dread ambush and Hunter's mark.
Not really. Ranger stinks.
A barbarian, fighter, or paladin can do anything a ranger could, better, in melee and are far more versatile and powerful classes.
If you want to be the ranger try to convince your DM to let you be the revised ranger from unearthed arcana. The revised ranger is on par with everyone else. If your DM is reluctant, tell them even Wizards acknowledges the ranger is underpowered, and this is the attempt to correct that. They (Wizards) literally preface the revised ranger by explaining that, before getting into the updated mechanics.
+1 Rep for using "Grody"
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
The thing to watch out for w/ a melee Ranger build is not to spread out your stats too thinly. Because DEX and WIS are your main stats, your multi-class would best be one that can work well with emphasizing those stats as well. Also, you need to watch out for disruption of Concentration, which can kill a lot of the more combat-oriented spell goodies that Rangers have access to. For that reason, you likely want to rely as little on concentration spells as possible through multi-classing with Rogue or Fighter or start with Fighter 1 before going Ranger b/c starting as Fighter nets you a CON save proficiency right off plus a fighting style.
As others have said, there are viable melee Ranger sub-classes. The issue is that you need to build one carefully b/c Rangers are more fragile than Paladins or Barbarians and are more reliant on spells than Fighters or Rogues.
Also, Horizon Walker can be pretty strong melee with the right feats. Force damage is always competitive and being able to *BAMF* up to someone and freeze tag them is very useful in many fights.
Short answer is yes in my opinion. The key is to get damage out of your bonus action. The most common way for that is to dual wield, but Ranger can get bonus action damage in several ways. Hunter's Mark is one way. It frees up the bonus action after one turn unless you have to recast, but it also takes a spell slot. If you have the Dragonmark Finding you get one free cast per long rest. Hunter can get extra damage on a single or an additional attack on another target, again without the bonus action. Horizon Walker can use the bonus action for an additional D8 damage and changing damage to force. If you aren't going dual wield then Dueling with the +2 damage is statistically a nice boost.
I don't feel like Rangers are playing catch up in the damage department. They can deal consistent multi-dice damage each turn in melee or at range. If you give the highest tier damage monkies an A grade, then rangers are easily a solid B, and they are also a B as a meat shield which the damage monkies typically aren't.
Everyone is the main character of their story
This ranger allegedly gagged someone with a spoon.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Have a look at the new UA ranger variant.
Attack: [roll]3d20dl2+6[/roll] Damage: [roll](if([roll:-1:critical], =0, 1d8, 2{1d8}.expand()))+4[/roll] Sneakattack: [roll](if([roll:-2:critical], =0, 2d6, 2{2d6}.expand()))[/roll]To actually tank (from my other post):
Here’s an idea - Shortsword, Half Plate and Shield. Max out your Dex the best you can. Wisdom won’t be that important. Go Hunter. Get Defense Fighting Style. Take Medium Armor Master and Shield Master.
Non-magical AC is 21.
For your Ranger archetype choices: Horde Breaker, Multi attack Defense, Uncanny Dodge.
This is a good economy of actions - if you get hit, you can use Uncanny to halve the damage. And then you get +4 AC on all the remaining attacks (25 AC). That’s a hefty boost and incredibly efficient.
Horde Breaker gets you an extra attack, but you still need a bonus action. That’s why you pick up Shield Master Feat - an extra Shove action to control the battlefield and get some spell defenses.
Best of all? No one will think a Ranger can handle the front lines but you’ll be an absolute juggernaut against the big beasts (especially the ones with Multiattack).
Level 1 spell - Ensnaring Strike. Keep the battlefield locked down. Bonus? Ensnaring Strike at the end of your first turn... hit melee the round after and shield bash to knock them down or away. Great synergy!
Could you build a fighter that RPs as a ranger? Or do you need to have some ability specific to the ranger class to achieve the build you want? If you need a specific ability, could a magic ring or other device provide you with that one ability?
I would imagine a fighter build using a half-elf could be made to be very much like a ranger and RP in that manner.
I think melee rangers are actually better than ranged rangers
Pure classed Melee rangers do comparable damage to barbarians: you're losing the (quite small, really) flat bonus damage that rage provides, but picking up Hunters Mark which should almost always be up, which comes out about the same. In exchange, you're less MAD than a Barbarian, and far more versatile using spells. At very high levels, a melee Ranger's spells can spike their damage quite high indeed with Steel Wind Strike, but in the meantime Hunter's Mark with two or three attacks per round leaves you on decent enough footing when compared against barbarians and fighters on non-action surge rounds.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I'm currently playing a 7/3 Horizon Walker Ranger/Order of the Mutant Blood hunter in one of my games. My main weapon is a flametongue greatsword. I have no issue keeping up with the damage output of the Paladin in my group. I'm a little behind the other ranger in the group, but that's because he has a ridiculously strong bow that was gifted to him and is also a rogue.
Admittedly, I am a little squishy because I'm using a greatsword and my DM consistently rolls high, but I have tons of fun with the character. Making a target take 4d6+d8+d4 force damage on a single hit is pretty fun, lol. (Horizon walker bonus action turns all damage to force, 4d6 from FLGS, D8 from the bonus action, d4 from blood hunter.)
I'd counter that Ranger is no more or less MAD than Barbarian. Ranger is going for Dex for melee damage, will want Con for taking hits if in Melee, and some degree of Wisdom- say 13. If going strength based, probably exactly like the Barbarian, who will want Strength for melee damage, con for taking hits and 14 dex for medium armor. At best you're going one off on standard array and taking two dump stats to 8 in point buy for barb.
Barbarians are one of the MADest classes in 5E, since you need three good stats for combat (Strength to attack, Dex AND Con for armor), even before considering the possibility that you might want to have a mediumish wisdom to track/spot stuff or roleplay. A ranger only needs to max Dexterity to be effective in combat, and is honestly more interested in Wisdom for skills than spell saves since they focus on self buffing and utility spells.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Depending on your build. If you are going array, you need to put a 15, 14, and 13 somewhere. Strength at 15, con at 13, and dex at 14 (plus wis at 12) gives you reasonable stats without considering racial bonuses. You use medium armor and your dex never needs to move. If you want feats, to use unarmored defense, or any number of other things sure it gets more MAD. But the same things can be said for Ranger, particularly if you go strength build, which would be similar to the barbarian build I mentioned above. Barb is one of the classes that forces you to seek out a defense stat separate from your melee damage stat, since you can't go heavy armor and use rage and use a dex build limits your rage bonus. The exception being a Loxodon barbarian, which would be behind on damage.
If you want to go archery ranger, you can simplify quite a bit, and finesse melee ranger can focus on dex and con to the exclusion of everything else. But the blanket statement that Barb is more MAD than ranger isn't true.
I feel like I just read 1+1 = 5.
A ranger (whether ranged or melee-finesse) need only max out Dexterity to hit 18 AC and full attack progression, and can safely tank Strength, Constitution, Intelligence, and Charisma, requiring only a middling Wisdom to keep multiclass open as an option or cast a save-based spell once in a while. A Barbarian instead needs to max out their strength, AND have a middling or high dexterity to hit the same 18 AC in armor, or high dexterity AND constitution to hit 18 AC out of armor.
It's not that it isn't doable, I'm just saying that a ranger relies on only one stat in combat (Dexterity), while a barbarian relies on three stats (Strength, Dexterity, Constitution) to achieve similar levels of combat effectiveness. That is the definition of MAD. A pure-classed ranger is very likely to have room to take feats. A pure-classed barbarian is going to be chasing ASI its entire career.
All of which is to say... yes, melee rangers are viable, and flexible, and don't require amazing stat rolls.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
How would you build a Glasya Tiefling Ranger for melee using point buy?
I'm assuming because Ranger has a lot of Bonus Action spells that dual wielding probably isn't the best idea? But then using a Two-Handed weapon would require too much strength. Suppose Rapier and Shield is always an option.
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'm a bit late stumbling into this response. My apologies.
I am of the mind that a class is a mechanic - a set of rules to play by with common identifiers to ... identify which rules are being used - and roleplay is independent of that. A Monk who's a pirate "Brawler"? Sure. Why not? Who's to say that a character with all the Monk abilities has to be monastic? Some may consider that "homebrew", but I consider it roleplay since only the names change, not the rules.
So... a Fighter class who identifies as a Ranger in roleplay would be fine by me (if it were me, and it's probably not).
EDIT: But I do think that the spirit of this thread is more on making a Ranger class character as a melee character (possibly identifying as a Fighter in roleplay while actually being a Ranger class in rules).
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
If you are talking about a melee ranger dumping Constitution, and getting 18 AC with just max dex then I'll assume you're talking studded leather armor and defense fighting style with the +5 from dex. 12+5+1=18. Any other fighting style and you're 17. The barb can't get the fighting style without multiclass, but can get 15+2=17 from wearing half plate and a 14 dex. The barb could then max strength and be just as effective as your ranger if in different ways. Unarmored defense is not needed and constitution is just as unnecessary as it is for your melee ranger. Rage also gives resistance to piercing, bludgeoning, and slashing damage and barbearian gets more. It's not always on like defense style but rage is also a default option. Half plate works fine with rage since it's not heavy armor. Plus barb has access to bigger die weapons and bigger hit die. Ranger does have Hunter's Mark to help offset the larger damage die, but it's on about as much as Rage and requires concentration.
All in all, I'd say it's a wash since the middling dex requirement for the barb AC can be obtained with a 12 or 13 plus a racial bonus, let alone the 14 from standard array. It does limit your other options, but it doesn't force you to chase ASIs anymore than a melee Ranger would have to do. Both would still need two full ASIs to max their attack stat and then could chase feats if they wanted to.
Melee Rangers in the first tier of play is going to out damage most other melee classes if you avoid beastmaster. Hunter, in any of its options, does excellent damage, if you're running up on a creature with a longsword (let's say) you're doing 1D8 for the sword, 1d8 for Colossus Slayer (let's say) and 1d6 for Hunter's mark, that's more then any other melee class can do in 1 attack except for a Paladin burning smites. Gloomstalker's do great damage in the 1st rounds of combat with their Ambush ability and that extra attack they get in round 1.
The problem with rangers is that their damage abilities do not scale as well as the other Martial classes outside of the first 5 levels while other classes their damage increases steadily. In the first 10 levels (which is what most players play) the Barbarian will out damage the other martial classes on average damage with Paladin's having the most burst damage potential. A Ranger really will benefit from taking 2 levels of Fighter for Action Surge or depending on how you rolled for stats (if you roll) taking a few levels of Paladin would help as well for Smite spells and Divine Smite. If you don't multi-class or your DM does not do multi-classing, then your Ranger can do good damage but if you're looking to rock everyone's world and be the groups primary Damage dealer, you probably will feel like you fall short.
But all the other cool things Rangers get make up for it in the Exploration part of D&D and what class you play means little for RP.