I've been meaning to expand my homebrews to include ranger subclasses but I'm curious about what's been done. What are the best ranger overhauls you've seen that rebuild the class without magic? Second, have you seen any attempt to port the arcane archer fighter subclass to the ranger? Finally, what are the best attempts you've seen to make a ranger that specializes in exploring towns and cities?
One obvious one is to make hunter’s mark a cantrip. That way you can use your other hunter concentration spells without “wasting” your hunter’s mark. It will still go away when you cast another concentration spell (no dangerous stacking) but at least you don’t lose a spell slot and can get it back after you’re done with your non-hunter’s mark spell.
The reason for this is to encourage more use of your non-mark spells without making you feel like you’re losing anything.
I love playing rangers. You might be interested in checking out the supplement I recently released at DMsGuild that revives the classic Swanmay as a ranger conclave. It does use a sprinkling of magic, along with some combat, defense, and shapechanging features.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Author of Fellozial's Ultimate Guide to Poison, The Primal Gith, and other forthcoming titles at DMs Guild
Two things to consider about a magic-less Ranger. First off is that, in D&D, the Ranger has always had access to magic. Back in 1st-2nd edition they actually used to cast both divine and arcane spells. So you would be taking away a big part of the character's history and what is a core part of the class despite that in many recent editions their spellcasting has seemed almost like an afterthought solely based off of that history. IMO the Ranger needs their spellcasting to be expanded and taken more seriously, rather than taken away.
Secondly, any homebrew Ranger that removes spellcasting still likely to fall into one of the greatest critiques of the Ranger class, which is that the best Ranger is the one that takes a class other than Ranger. A Fighter (Arcane Archer, Battlemaster) or a Rogue (Scout) with the Outlander background easily outpaces the Ranger in non-spellcasting features (multiclassing these two works well) and will only fall behind in the heavily underutilized (depending on the DM) traveling and foraging mechanics.
Even in the rare instance where Natural Explorer would be beneficial to the party, a Fighter/Rogue themed around a woodsman/explorer/hunter combined with your spellcasters has little problem surviving the wilds. If a Druid or Nature Cleric is in the party then the worst conditions you may find yourself in becomes equivalent to a bad camping trip. All other abilities the aforementioned Fighter/Rogue wouldn't be so good at is easily covered by your spellcasters as well other classes just often being able to do the same or very similar things as a Ranger, but often sooner and/or better.
Maybe someone can create a Ranger without spellcasting that is more than just copying or slightly tweaking the above Fighter/Rogue options, and more power to them, but as far as I'm concerned taking away spellcasting isn't the answer.
I've always felt that a Rogue (Scout)/Fighter (Arcane Archer) with the Magic Initiate Feat (for Find Familiar to get an animal companion) makes a better ranger than the Ranger.
I've got one I am found of but have never playtested. Alternate rangers are a tricky business. It seems a class that is hard to please everyone. I just want the ranger to have some special mechanic that makes the class special in some way. To give it a reason to exist.
One obvious one is to make hunter’s mark a cantrip. That way you can use your other hunter concentration spells without “wasting” your hunter’s mark. It will still go away when you cast another concentration spell (no dangerous stacking) but at least you don’t lose a spell slot and can get it back after you’re done with your non-hunter’s mark spell.
The reason for this is to encourage more use of your non-mark spells without making you feel like you’re losing anything.
That's pretty intuitive. There are a billion Hunter's Mark homebrews that do this that a I can check out.
Two things to consider about a magic-less Ranger. First off is that, in D&D, the Ranger has always had access to magic. Back in 1st-2nd edition they actually used to cast both divine and arcane spells. So you would be taking away a big part of the character's history and what is a core part of the class despite that in many recent editions their spellcasting has seemed almost like an afterthought solely based off of that history. IMO the Ranger needs their spellcasting to be expanded and taken more seriously, rather than taken away.
Secondly, any homebrew Ranger that removes spellcasting still likely to fall into one of the greatest critiques of the Ranger class, which is that the best Ranger is the one that takes a class other than Ranger. A Fighter (Arcane Archer, Battlemaster) or a Rogue (Scout) with the Outlander background easily outpaces the Ranger in non-spellcasting features (multiclassing these two works well) and will only fall behind in the heavily underutilized (depending on the DM) traveling and foraging mechanics.
Even in the rare instance where Natural Explorer would be beneficial to the party, a Fighter/Rogue themed around a woodsman/explorer/hunter combined with your spellcasters has little problem surviving the wilds. If a Druid or Nature Cleric is in the party then the worst conditions you may find yourself in becomes equivalent to a bad camping trip. All other abilities the aforementioned Fighter/Rogue wouldn't be so good at is easily covered by your spellcasters as well other classes just often being able to do the same or very similar things as a Ranger, but often sooner and/or better.
Maybe someone can create a Ranger without spellcasting that is more than just copying or slightly tweaking the above Fighter/Rogue options, and more power to them, but as far as I'm concerned taking away spellcasting isn't the answer.
I agree that magic is part and parcel of the ranger, but on the other hand a non-magic ranger has been discussed officially in earlier editions as well. The 3.5e UA book comes to mind. Speaking of which, I could imagine the ranger having more value with a greater selection of spells, which seems not to be the goal of 5e devs.
I've always felt that a Rogue (Scout)/Fighter (Arcane Archer) with the Magic Initiate Feat (for Find Familiar to get an animal companion) makes a better ranger than the Ranger.
Sounds about right. I don't know why the scout was included as a rogue rather than ranger subclass.
I've got one I am found of but have never playtested. Alternate rangers are a tricky business. It seems a class that is hard to please everyone. I just want the ranger to have some special mechanic that makes the class special in some way. To give it a reason to exist.
Yeah, that's true. I'm asking a variety of questions to see which approach works for me. Favored enemy used to be a more interesting ability when it included combat bonuses. This variant is neat, but I'm concerned about the fiddling around with initiative which can lead to strange results with spell timing and whatnot.
It's not a huge boost, but I'd suggest that Rangers get Expertise in Nature and Survival. If Rogues and Bards get expertise, why not Rangers as well? When you think of a Ranger, you think of Nature and Survival. So seems to me that they should get expertise in these two skills at some point at a low level like level 3 or 4 (but only if they have proficiency in those skills already, if they don't have proficiency in the skill, I would just give them the extra skill proficiency, rather than expertise).
Another small boost is that I would change Primeval Awareness to being a number of times equal to your Wisdom modifier (minimum 1), and you get all your uses back on a long rest, instead of using a spell slot.
I would suggest a similar change to Hunter's Mark - you can cast it a number of times equal to your Wisdom modifier (minimum 1), and you get all your uses back on a short rest, instead of using a spell slot.
These last two are suggestions that would help do what Korbin Orion is suggesting and make Ranger spellcasting take a bigger role. By moving these two abilities away from spell slots, it lets Rangers use their spell slots and spells known for other purposes.
I'm going to assume you meant the Variant Ranger from Complete Warrior, as the Planar, Urban and Prestige Rangers from 3.5 UA all had spellcasting. You could take that as a baseline for a new Ranger without spells, so they gain fast movement, ability score boosts for one minute, a healing touch to remove poison or disease, and can cast freedom of movement once per day. To me, this still doesn't fix the Ranger but it at least sends you in an alright direction for something that may be a bit more palatable for one who isn't keen on Ranger spellcasting.
The Complete Adventurer in 3.5 introduced the Scout which is very similar to a Rogue Scout in 5e. I believe the reason it was given to Rogue instead of Ranger was that the original Scout class was quite literally a Ranger/Rogue hybrid without spellcasting or animal companion.
The major issue with removing spells from the ranger is that it would be god awful without major revisions. The scout subclass for the rogue is pretty much what you want. One simple option would be to use the base kit of ranger minus the spells and add the multiple attacks of fighters.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hi all,
I've been meaning to expand my homebrews to include ranger subclasses but I'm curious about what's been done. What are the best ranger overhauls you've seen that rebuild the class without magic? Second, have you seen any attempt to port the arcane archer fighter subclass to the ranger? Finally, what are the best attempts you've seen to make a ranger that specializes in exploring towns and cities?
Thanks!
One obvious one is to make hunter’s mark a cantrip. That way you can use your other hunter concentration spells without “wasting” your hunter’s mark. It will still go away when you cast another concentration spell (no dangerous stacking) but at least you don’t lose a spell slot and can get it back after you’re done with your non-hunter’s mark spell.
The reason for this is to encourage more use of your non-mark spells without making you feel like you’re losing anything.
I love playing rangers. You might be interested in checking out the supplement I recently released at DMsGuild that revives the classic Swanmay as a ranger conclave. It does use a sprinkling of magic, along with some combat, defense, and shapechanging features.
Two things to consider about a magic-less Ranger. First off is that, in D&D, the Ranger has always had access to magic. Back in 1st-2nd edition they actually used to cast both divine and arcane spells. So you would be taking away a big part of the character's history and what is a core part of the class despite that in many recent editions their spellcasting has seemed almost like an afterthought solely based off of that history. IMO the Ranger needs their spellcasting to be expanded and taken more seriously, rather than taken away.
Secondly, any homebrew Ranger that removes spellcasting still likely to fall into one of the greatest critiques of the Ranger class, which is that the best Ranger is the one that takes a class other than Ranger. A Fighter (Arcane Archer, Battlemaster) or a Rogue (Scout) with the Outlander background easily outpaces the Ranger in non-spellcasting features (multiclassing these two works well) and will only fall behind in the heavily underutilized (depending on the DM) traveling and foraging mechanics.
Even in the rare instance where Natural Explorer would be beneficial to the party, a Fighter/Rogue themed around a woodsman/explorer/hunter combined with your spellcasters has little problem surviving the wilds. If a Druid or Nature Cleric is in the party then the worst conditions you may find yourself in becomes equivalent to a bad camping trip. All other abilities the aforementioned Fighter/Rogue wouldn't be so good at is easily covered by your spellcasters as well other classes just often being able to do the same or very similar things as a Ranger, but often sooner and/or better.
Maybe someone can create a Ranger without spellcasting that is more than just copying or slightly tweaking the above Fighter/Rogue options, and more power to them, but as far as I'm concerned taking away spellcasting isn't the answer.
I've always felt that a Rogue (Scout)/Fighter (Arcane Archer) with the Magic Initiate Feat (for Find Familiar to get an animal companion) makes a better ranger than the Ranger.
I've got one I am found of but have never playtested. Alternate rangers are a tricky business. It seems a class that is hard to please everyone. I just want the ranger to have some special mechanic that makes the class special in some way. To give it a reason to exist.
https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/Hy5nLZiSZ
Current Characters I am playing: Dr Konstantin van Wulf | Taegen Willowrun | Mad Magnar
Check out my homebrew: Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Feats
That's pretty intuitive. There are a billion Hunter's Mark homebrews that do this that a I can check out.
I agree that magic is part and parcel of the ranger, but on the other hand a non-magic ranger has been discussed officially in earlier editions as well. The 3.5e UA book comes to mind. Speaking of which, I could imagine the ranger having more value with a greater selection of spells, which seems not to be the goal of 5e devs.
Sounds about right. I don't know why the scout was included as a rogue rather than ranger subclass.
Yeah, that's true. I'm asking a variety of questions to see which approach works for me. Favored enemy used to be a more interesting ability when it included combat bonuses. This variant is neat, but I'm concerned about the fiddling around with initiative which can lead to strange results with spell timing and whatnot.
It's not a huge boost, but I'd suggest that Rangers get Expertise in Nature and Survival. If Rogues and Bards get expertise, why not Rangers as well? When you think of a Ranger, you think of Nature and Survival. So seems to me that they should get expertise in these two skills at some point at a low level like level 3 or 4 (but only if they have proficiency in those skills already, if they don't have proficiency in the skill, I would just give them the extra skill proficiency, rather than expertise).
Another small boost is that I would change Primeval Awareness to being a number of times equal to your Wisdom modifier (minimum 1), and you get all your uses back on a long rest, instead of using a spell slot.
I would suggest a similar change to Hunter's Mark - you can cast it a number of times equal to your Wisdom modifier (minimum 1), and you get all your uses back on a short rest, instead of using a spell slot.
These last two are suggestions that would help do what Korbin Orion is suggesting and make Ranger spellcasting take a bigger role. By moving these two abilities away from spell slots, it lets Rangers use their spell slots and spells known for other purposes.
I'm going to assume you meant the Variant Ranger from Complete Warrior, as the Planar, Urban and Prestige Rangers from 3.5 UA all had spellcasting. You could take that as a baseline for a new Ranger without spells, so they gain fast movement, ability score boosts for one minute, a healing touch to remove poison or disease, and can cast freedom of movement once per day. To me, this still doesn't fix the Ranger but it at least sends you in an alright direction for something that may be a bit more palatable for one who isn't keen on Ranger spellcasting.
The Complete Adventurer in 3.5 introduced the Scout which is very similar to a Rogue Scout in 5e. I believe the reason it was given to Rogue instead of Ranger was that the original Scout class was quite literally a Ranger/Rogue hybrid without spellcasting or animal companion.
The major issue with removing spells from the ranger is that it would be god awful without major revisions. The scout subclass for the rogue is pretty much what you want. One simple option would be to use the base kit of ranger minus the spells and add the multiple attacks of fighters.