I don't understand why they are already trying to introduce new sub classes when a lot of folks still haven't even transitioned out of 2014.
Putting aside that the book itself won't release for months, what are they supposed to do, not test any new content until every straggler switches? Nah, I'll take the new stuff.
That ranger is lackluster too. They already get access to Pass without a Trace as a spell, plus any concentration effects are going to mess with hunter's mark.
Nothing is forcing any ranger to concentrate exclusively on Hunter's Mark.
I don't understand why they are already trying to introduce new sub classes when a lot of folks still haven't even transitioned out of 2014.
Putting aside that the book itself won't release for months, what are they supposed to do, not test any new content until every straggler switches? Nah, I'll take the new stuff.
That ranger is lackluster too. They already get access to Pass without a Trace as a spell, plus any concentration effects are going to mess with hunter's mark.
Nothing is forcing any ranger to concentrate exclusively on Hunter's Mark.
While I agree, nothing is forcing concentration of HM, WotC has HM as a core feature of the Ranger class and subclasses will build on that. So you very well may need to drop concentration on HM to use something else if the situation calls for it, it does make other concentration spells a harder choice with consequences. Which I’m fine with, btw.
Please explain how HM concentration meaningfully differs from if Mage Armor were a Concentration spell.. and you couldn't cast Shield without Mage Armor active?
If Weapon Mastery for Versatile or One-Handed weapons required two hands, and took a Bonus Action for Two-handed weapons?
If spells that restore HP required the caster to concentrate until the end of the target's next turn?
While it's possible to construct some sort of line of reasoning that justifies these absurdities, they're all essentially envy-based nerfs built on someone's arbitrary perception that without such needless complications the class is "overpowered".
Rangers are not overpowered if they can cast HM without concentration. Wizards aren't overpowered if they can cast Shield without concentration-based Mage Armor. Fighters aren't overpowered because of weapon masteries. Healers aren't overpowered when they heal. These are core class features. Why make a class that's frustrating to play, just because someone playing a different class is envious?
HM could just as easily have a restriction on it like "Distraction"; you don't have to maintain Concentration, but if you fail a Concentration check when the DM calls for one (because you took damage, etc), you lose HM until you cast it again.
Please explain how HM concentration meaningfully differs from if Mage Armor were a Concentration spell.. and you couldn't cast Shield without Mage Armor active?
Given that it's a ridiculous +10 bonus to the entire party... yes. If it was a caster-only ability that gave stealth proficiency, or expertise if already proficient, I could see it not requiring concentration.
Should a Ranger be able to support their party with Pass Without Trace, while still being capable of silencing enemy scouts with a well-placed bowshot and HM?
Sure, there are superficial similarities between HM and Hex. But then, the entire Warlock progression has nothing that depends on Hex being active on a target, as the 2024 Ranger does for HM.
I'm perfectly okay playing 2024 Ranger RAW. Through Tier 1, it's a superior combat class. But then, I'm happy playing with the toys the toymakers created, by the rules they set.
Mostly I just wish I didn't feel like sometimes those rules were there to appease envious spoilsports.
While I agree, nothing is forcing concentration of HM, WotC has HM as a core feature of the Ranger class and subclasses will build on that. So you very well may need to drop concentration on HM to use something else if the situation calls for it, it does make other concentration spells a harder choice with consequences. Which I’m fine with, btw.
That was the whole point of giving us 6 free uses, so that dropping concentration on it wouldn't be a big deal.
Rangers are not overpowered if they can cast HM without concentration. Wizards aren't overpowered if they can cast Shield without concentration-based Mage Armor. Fighters aren't overpowered because of weapon masteries. Healers aren't overpowered when they heal. These are core class features. Why make a class that's frustrating to play, just because someone playing a different class is envious?
I could see an argument against stacking HM with, say, Swift Quiver or Elemental Weapon. But at the end of the day, Rangers simply have better things to concentrate on, so getting hung up on HM just makes no sense to me. I would much rather have Spike Growth, Conjure Woodland Beings, Guardian of Nature etc running. HM is just a nice little freebie I can throw on for weaker combats when I want a bit of extra DPR.
Given that it's a ridiculous +10 bonus to the entire party... yes. If it was a caster-only ability that gave stealth proficiency, or expertise if already proficient, I could see it not requiring concentration.
I misread that the first time as giving a bonus to leave no tracks, not a blanket bonus. Oops. That probably is too good for a 2nd level, 1 hour spell.
Please explain how HM concentration meaningfully differs from if Mage Armor were a Concentration spell.. and you couldn't cast Shield without Mage Armor active?
With both hex and hunters mark I think the question is how much of their expected damage is tied up with being bale to keep it going as both classes are primarily consistent damage per round classes. Due to weapon masteries and specifically nick the ranger is a bit off kilter with that question, I don't think keeping hunters mark going is necessary levels 1-5, but higher levels where the ranger is even less likely to have it going due to their other concentration options it is more needed to keep their DPR up to snuff. So it probably should be a class feature to make it no concentration or can concentrate on two spells as long as one is HM at level 7+ as their damage drops off in tier 3. Warlocks need something, and a bit earlier than tier 3 but I am not sure working around hex is the fix.
Should a Ranger be able to support their party with Pass Without Trace, while still being capable of silencing enemy scouts with a well-placed bowshot and HM?
Sure, there are superficial similarities between HM and Hex. But then, the entire Warlock progression has nothing that depends on Hex being active on a target, as the 2024 Ranger does for HM.
Why do people say this? Up until level 13, a Ranger gets exactly the same amount of benefit from having HM active as a Warlock gets from having Hex active. If Ranger is dependent on HM for DPR, then so is Warlock, if Warlock isn't then either is Ranger.
In the specific scenario you're discussing, you already have advantage on your attack roll from being hidden, so again the only benefit you are getting from HM is the 1d6 extra damage. If you did cast HM then it would break your Hiding so it would give the enemy a better shot at beating your initiative and escaping and/or raising the alarm.
Just because you have free uses of HM doesn't mean you are forced to use them or that you will be somehow a weaker character if you don't use them and use a more powerful spell from a spellslot instead.
Should a Ranger be able to support their party with Pass Without Trace, while still being capable of silencing enemy scouts with a well-placed bowshot and HM?
Sure, there are superficial similarities between HM and Hex. But then, the entire Warlock progression has nothing that depends on Hex being active on a target, as the 2024 Ranger does for HM.
Why do people say this? Up until level 13, a Ranger gets exactly the same amount of benefit from having HM active as a Warlock gets from having Hex active. If Ranger is dependent on HM for DPR, then so is Warlock, if Warlock isn't then either is Ranger.
In the specific scenario you're discussing, you already have advantage on your attack roll from being hidden, so again the only benefit you are getting from HM is the 1d6 extra damage. If you did cast HM then it would break your Hiding so it would give the enemy a better shot at beating your initiative and escaping and/or raising the alarm.
Just because you have free uses of HM doesn't mean you are forced to use them or that you will be somehow a weaker character if you don't use them and use a more powerful spell from a spellslot instead.
That's not quite accurate. The benefit from hitting while the spells are up is similar. The Ranger's Force damage is less likely to be resisted, but at level 3 and 4, the Warlock's Hex is lasting 4 hours per casting, 8 hours at level 5, and 24 hours at level 9. At level 9, the Ranger first gets the option to spend a level 3 slot to make it last 8 hours (there is no 4 hour option with a level 2 slot).
In addition, the Warlock has plenty of damaging options, including damaging cantrips, that will typically be hitting once a turn. A Ranger will be more reliant than a Warlock on hitting multiple times a turn in order to multiply the damage from Hunter's Mark.
Should a Ranger be able to support their party with Pass Without Trace, while still being capable of silencing enemy scouts with a well-placed bowshot and HM?
Sure, there are superficial similarities between HM and Hex. But then, the entire Warlock progression has nothing that depends on Hex being active on a target, as the 2024 Ranger does for HM.
Why do people say this? Up until level 13, a Ranger gets exactly the same amount of benefit from having HM active as a Warlock gets from having Hex active. If Ranger is dependent on HM for DPR, then so is Warlock, if Warlock isn't then either is Ranger.
In the specific scenario you're discussing, you already have advantage on your attack roll from being hidden, so again the only benefit you are getting from HM is the 1d6 extra damage. If you did cast HM then it would break your Hiding so it would give the enemy a better shot at beating your initiative and escaping and/or raising the alarm.
Just because you have free uses of HM doesn't mean you are forced to use them or that you will be somehow a weaker character if you don't use them and use a more powerful spell from a spellslot instead.
That's not quite accurate. The benefit from hitting while the spells are up is similar. The Ranger's Force damage is less likely to be resisted, but at level 3 and 4, the Warlock's Hex is lasting 4 hours per casting, 8 hours at level 5, and 24 hours at level 9. At level 9, the Ranger first gets the option to spend a level 3 slot to make it last 8 hours (there is no 4 hour option with a level 2 slot).
In addition, the Warlock has plenty of damaging options, including damaging cantrips, that will typically be hitting once a turn. A Ranger will be more reliant than a Warlock on hitting multiple times a turn in order to multiply the damage from Hunter's Mark.
While yes a warlocks hex scales in duration faster they will have far less of them so that is a wash, and no not really the warlock does not really have plenty of damaging options. Their spell list isn't really around that, and while sure they can pick a cantrip that doesn't hit multiple times they almost always will be taking eldritch blast. A couple sub classes have big boom spells but its not the norm. Warlocks play pretty close to mystic archers/warriors. The only real difference is rangers can get 4 attacks by level 5 with a specific build. But their ranged builds will play out close to a eldritch blaster.
In addition, the Warlock has plenty of damaging options, including damaging cantrips, that will typically be hitting once a turn. A Ranger will be more reliant than a Warlock on hitting multiple times a turn in order to multiply the damage from Hunter's Mark.
A warlock using a cantrip that hits 1/round rather than Eldritch Blast is severely under performing in terms of DPR compared to one that takes Eldritch Blast even without considering Hex due to the scaling of Agonizing Blast. Other than that they have 2 spellslots per SR so good luck with spending more than 1 per combat, you certainly cannot afford to use one every round. Ranger also gets spells other than HM, and gets more of them to spend now that they have free uses of HM, and they have roughly the same number of damaging spells as warlock (Fiend-lock excepted). For both Warlock and Ranger typically your best move is to summon something and concentrate on that summoning spell.
what it boils down to, is a lot of rangers don't like the idea of having to choose between HM and other spells.
And many now feel like because its a class feature they are supposed to use it all the time
I get it, however the truth is you dont have to use HM all the time to be competitive, and there are many features in a class that you only use situationally..
they added more spells that dont use concentration.
and you are very capable of dropping HM some times and turning it on at others.
i dont think rangers have an inherrent right to do max damage while supporting either. generally speaking, concentrating on support spells comes with an opportunity cost for dps. cleric gives up spiritual weapon/spirit guardians/summons to cast bless.
an archfey ranger is pretty competitive with HM builds.
A archfey ranger is competitive with a HM build sure, but is it competitive with a paladin, a wizard, a cleric etc. And in tier 1 and 2 the answer appears to be yes. In tier 3+ not so much. So maybe by the time you get there they should have freed up HM as a concentration spell so it was additive to their other abilities instead of a either or option.
A archfey ranger is competitive with a HM build sure, but is it competitive with a paladin, a wizard, a cleric etc. And in tier 1 and 2 the answer appears to be yes. In tier 3+ not so much. So maybe by the time you get there they should have freed up HM as a concentration spell so it was additive to their other abilities instead of a either or option.
it being additive was tested, with an arguably weaker hunter's mark, and it was over performing.
if you took the current ranger, and add the current concentration spells, they would blow everyone else out the water. ranger is behind the upper performers in t3 by like 5-10 dpr. (according to treants builds, which did not go for full damage) adding things like summon bestial spirit (lvl2)+6.5dpr (conjure animalslvl3)+8.25(*multiple creatures) summon elemental (lvl4) +17.5 and swift quiver(lvl5)+21 and at level 20, +24.
would clearly be substantially an outlier, especially when the class has utility and aoe options other martials dont have. and they werent actually weak in t1, t2, or even really in t4.
unless HM was substantially weaker, this wouldnt really work.
well, maybe that would be working, if you wanted ranger to be the best martial, in all level ranges.
A archfey ranger is competitive with a HM build sure, but is it competitive with a paladin, a wizard, a cleric etc. And in tier 1 and 2 the answer appears to be yes. In tier 3+ not so much. So maybe by the time you get there they should have freed up HM as a concentration spell so it was additive to their other abilities instead of a either or option.
it being additive was tested, with an arguably weaker hunter's mark, and it was over performing.
if you took the current ranger, and add the current concentration spells, they would blow everyone else out the water. ranger is behind the upper performers in t3 by like 5-10 dpr. (according to treants builds, which did not go for full damage) adding things like summon bestial spirit (lvl2)+6.5dpr (conjure animalslvl3)+8.25(*multiple creatures) summon elemental (lvl4) +17.5 and swift quiver(lvl5)+21 and at level 20, +24.
would clearly be substantially an outlier, especially when the class has utility and aoe options other martials dont have. and they werent actually weak in t1, t2, or even really in t4.
unless HM was substantially weaker, this wouldnt really work.
well, maybe that would be working, if you wanted ranger to be the best martial, in all level ranges.
They are largely underperforming now in Tier 3 and 4 I somehow doubt 1d6 per hit would make them jump to over perform.
A archfey ranger is competitive with a HM build sure, but is it competitive with a paladin, a wizard, a cleric etc. And in tier 1 and 2 the answer appears to be yes. In tier 3+ not so much. So maybe by the time you get there they should have freed up HM as a concentration spell so it was additive to their other abilities instead of a either or option.
it being additive was tested, with an arguably weaker hunter's mark, and it was over performing.
if you took the current ranger, and add the current concentration spells, they would blow everyone else out the water. ranger is behind the upper performers in t3 by like 5-10 dpr. (according to treants builds, which did not go for full damage) adding things like summon bestial spirit (lvl2)+6.5dpr (conjure animalslvl3)+8.25(*multiple creatures) summon elemental (lvl4) +17.5 and swift quiver(lvl5)+21 and at level 20, +24.
would clearly be substantially an outlier, especially when the class has utility and aoe options other martials dont have. and they werent actually weak in t1, t2, or even really in t4.
unless HM was substantially weaker, this wouldnt really work.
well, maybe that would be working, if you wanted ranger to be the best martial, in all level ranges.
They are largely underperforming now in Tier 3 and 4 I somehow doubt 1d6 per hit would make them jump to over perform.
underperforming who, by how much. its entirely possible that adding 14 points of damage per round would make them over perform. especially since some of these other classes only have single target damage going for them.
People get myopic about Ranger spells because they compare them to full caster options at the same tier. The spells are not supposed to make them competitive at that stage, they're supposed to be adding things like AoE options to a primarily martial setup. No, Conjure Barrage isn't as good as Fireball, and you get it later and yadda yadda yadda; but hit 3 targets with it and you're doing about 66 damage if everyone passes their DEX save, with an extra 22 per head for any additional targets. How many 9th level Fighters or Barbarians can do that kind of burst damage?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Putting aside that the book itself won't release for months, what are they supposed to do, not test any new content until every straggler switches? Nah, I'll take the new stuff.
Nothing is forcing any ranger to concentrate exclusively on Hunter's Mark.
While I agree, nothing is forcing concentration of HM, WotC has HM as a core feature of the Ranger class and subclasses will build on that. So you very well may need to drop concentration on HM to use something else if the situation calls for it, it does make other concentration spells a harder choice with consequences. Which I’m fine with, btw.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
re: HM Concentration
Please explain how HM concentration meaningfully differs from if Mage Armor were a Concentration spell.. and you couldn't cast Shield without Mage Armor active?
If Weapon Mastery for Versatile or One-Handed weapons required two hands, and took a Bonus Action for Two-handed weapons?
If spells that restore HP required the caster to concentrate until the end of the target's next turn?
While it's possible to construct some sort of line of reasoning that justifies these absurdities, they're all essentially envy-based nerfs built on someone's arbitrary perception that without such needless complications the class is "overpowered".
Rangers are not overpowered if they can cast HM without concentration. Wizards aren't overpowered if they can cast Shield without concentration-based Mage Armor. Fighters aren't overpowered because of weapon masteries. Healers aren't overpowered when they heal. These are core class features. Why make a class that's frustrating to play, just because someone playing a different class is envious?
HM could just as easily have a restriction on it like "Distraction"; you don't have to maintain Concentration, but if you fail a Concentration check when the DM calls for one (because you took damage, etc), you lose HM until you cast it again.
It's the same with Hex.
I would instead ask if Pass without Trace needs to have Concentration.
How to add Tooltips.
Given that it's a ridiculous +10 bonus to the entire party... yes. If it was a caster-only ability that gave stealth proficiency, or expertise if already proficient, I could see it not requiring concentration.
Should a Ranger be able to support their party with Pass Without Trace, while still being capable of silencing enemy scouts with a well-placed bowshot and HM?
Sure, there are superficial similarities between HM and Hex. But then, the entire Warlock progression has nothing that depends on Hex being active on a target, as the 2024 Ranger does for HM.
I'm perfectly okay playing 2024 Ranger RAW. Through Tier 1, it's a superior combat class. But then, I'm happy playing with the toys the toymakers created, by the rules they set.
Mostly I just wish I didn't feel like sometimes those rules were there to appease envious spoilsports.
That was the whole point of giving us 6 free uses, so that dropping concentration on it wouldn't be a big deal.
I could see an argument against stacking HM with, say, Swift Quiver or Elemental Weapon. But at the end of the day, Rangers simply have better things to concentrate on, so getting hung up on HM just makes no sense to me. I would much rather have Spike Growth, Conjure Woodland Beings, Guardian of Nature etc running. HM is just a nice little freebie I can throw on for weaker combats when I want a bit of extra DPR.
I misread that the first time as giving a bonus to leave no tracks, not a blanket bonus. Oops. That probably is too good for a 2nd level, 1 hour spell.
How to add Tooltips.
With both hex and hunters mark I think the question is how much of their expected damage is tied up with being bale to keep it going as both classes are primarily consistent damage per round classes. Due to weapon masteries and specifically nick the ranger is a bit off kilter with that question, I don't think keeping hunters mark going is necessary levels 1-5, but higher levels where the ranger is even less likely to have it going due to their other concentration options it is more needed to keep their DPR up to snuff. So it probably should be a class feature to make it no concentration or can concentrate on two spells as long as one is HM at level 7+ as their damage drops off in tier 3. Warlocks need something, and a bit earlier than tier 3 but I am not sure working around hex is the fix.
Why do people say this? Up until level 13, a Ranger gets exactly the same amount of benefit from having HM active as a Warlock gets from having Hex active. If Ranger is dependent on HM for DPR, then so is Warlock, if Warlock isn't then either is Ranger.
In the specific scenario you're discussing, you already have advantage on your attack roll from being hidden, so again the only benefit you are getting from HM is the 1d6 extra damage. If you did cast HM then it would break your Hiding so it would give the enemy a better shot at beating your initiative and escaping and/or raising the alarm.
Just because you have free uses of HM doesn't mean you are forced to use them or that you will be somehow a weaker character if you don't use them and use a more powerful spell from a spellslot instead.
That's not quite accurate. The benefit from hitting while the spells are up is similar. The Ranger's Force damage is less likely to be resisted, but at level 3 and 4, the Warlock's Hex is lasting 4 hours per casting, 8 hours at level 5, and 24 hours at level 9. At level 9, the Ranger first gets the option to spend a level 3 slot to make it last 8 hours (there is no 4 hour option with a level 2 slot).
In addition, the Warlock has plenty of damaging options, including damaging cantrips, that will typically be hitting once a turn. A Ranger will be more reliant than a Warlock on hitting multiple times a turn in order to multiply the damage from Hunter's Mark.
How to add Tooltips.
While yes a warlocks hex scales in duration faster they will have far less of them so that is a wash, and no not really the warlock does not really have plenty of damaging options. Their spell list isn't really around that, and while sure they can pick a cantrip that doesn't hit multiple times they almost always will be taking eldritch blast. A couple sub classes have big boom spells but its not the norm. Warlocks play pretty close to mystic archers/warriors. The only real difference is rangers can get 4 attacks by level 5 with a specific build. But their ranged builds will play out close to a eldritch blaster.
A warlock using a cantrip that hits 1/round rather than Eldritch Blast is severely under performing in terms of DPR compared to one that takes Eldritch Blast even without considering Hex due to the scaling of Agonizing Blast. Other than that they have 2 spellslots per SR so good luck with spending more than 1 per combat, you certainly cannot afford to use one every round. Ranger also gets spells other than HM, and gets more of them to spend now that they have free uses of HM, and they have roughly the same number of damaging spells as warlock (Fiend-lock excepted). For both Warlock and Ranger typically your best move is to summon something and concentrate on that summoning spell.
what it boils down to, is a lot of rangers don't like the idea of having to choose between HM and other spells.
And many now feel like because its a class feature they are supposed to use it all the time
I get it, however the truth is you dont have to use HM all the time to be competitive, and there are many features in a class that you only use situationally..
they added more spells that dont use concentration.
and you are very capable of dropping HM some times and turning it on at others.
i dont think rangers have an inherrent right to do max damage while supporting either. generally speaking, concentrating on support spells comes with an opportunity cost for dps. cleric gives up spiritual weapon/spirit guardians/summons to cast bless.
an archfey ranger is pretty competitive with HM builds.
A archfey ranger is competitive with a HM build sure, but is it competitive with a paladin, a wizard, a cleric etc. And in tier 1 and 2 the answer appears to be yes. In tier 3+ not so much. So maybe by the time you get there they should have freed up HM as a concentration spell so it was additive to their other abilities instead of a either or option.
it being additive was tested, with an arguably weaker hunter's mark, and it was over performing.
if you took the current ranger, and add the current concentration spells, they would blow everyone else out the water. ranger is behind the upper performers in t3 by like 5-10 dpr. (according to treants builds, which did not go for full damage) adding things like summon bestial spirit (lvl2)+6.5dpr (conjure animalslvl3)+8.25(*multiple creatures) summon elemental (lvl4) +17.5 and swift quiver(lvl5)+21 and at level 20, +24.
would clearly be substantially an outlier, especially when the class has utility and aoe options other martials dont have. and they werent actually weak in t1, t2, or even really in t4.
unless HM was substantially weaker, this wouldnt really work.
well, maybe that would be working, if you wanted ranger to be the best martial, in all level ranges.
They are largely underperforming now in Tier 3 and 4 I somehow doubt 1d6 per hit would make them jump to over perform.
underperforming who, by how much. its entirely possible that adding 14 points of damage per round would make them over perform. especially since some of these other classes only have single target damage going for them.
Could make HM concentration-free as a level 11 feature, that would be unlikely to break anything.
People get myopic about Ranger spells because they compare them to full caster options at the same tier. The spells are not supposed to make them competitive at that stage, they're supposed to be adding things like AoE options to a primarily martial setup. No, Conjure Barrage isn't as good as Fireball, and you get it later and yadda yadda yadda; but hit 3 targets with it and you're doing about 66 damage if everyone passes their DEX save, with an extra 22 per head for any additional targets. How many 9th level Fighters or Barbarians can do that kind of burst damage?