I’m playing a ranger for the first time with 5e and one of my co-players keeps warning me off of them, saying while they’re mostly identical to a fighter at level 1, they will “suck” at higher levels due to lack of scaling. I don’t think this is true, personally, unless your game is pretty munchkin with little exploration or use for utility. In any event, it’s unlikely to be true until at least level 11. Nonetheless, with me playing a ranger and in the wake of the new unearthed arcana class features, the idea of what is “wrong” with the ranger has been on my mind.
I think the class variant features are an interesting attempt. It seems like they’re trying to take the class features that are very DM-dependent (e.g. not getting lost, traveling fast), and replace them with things that have concrete benefits (e.g. tireless, canny, roving). They also attempt to make hunters mark a more permanent fixture contributing to the ranger’s damage via reworking favored enemy into favored foe. I like the rework, especially in that it removes the requirement to concentrate.
#1 So many of the Ranger’s damaging spells have a concentration component to them, and it makes it so that you can never have the advantage of hunters mark and the damaging spell (e.g. Zephyr Strike, Hail of Thorns, Flame Arrows, Lightning Arrow). So here is my first idea - instead of or in addition to making hunter’s mark a class (i.e. non-spell) feature, why would you not make these ranger spells akin to green flame blade? You just make an attack as part of casting the spell.
#2 In addition to the concentration issues, a lot of these spells are just plain crap. To whit, flame arrows allows you to do the same damage as hunters mark, but only 12 times. You can share the fire damage, but it’s limited use and hence not worth the spell slot OR the spells known slot. Lightning arrow does poor damage and a weak ae for a 3rd level spell that the Ranger will get at what? Level 11? How would it hurt the game to do 1d6 more on top of it. T main benefit these spells have over hunters mark is the damage type, so why not make a spell that just lets you dictate the damage type of your arrow as a level 3rd? That would give additional flexibility in terms of damage type.
#3 I really like the concrete bonuses in the unearthed arcana class feature variant piece. I think tireless should scale with level. 1d10 plus wisdom is ridiculously powerful at level 1 but something of an afterthought at level 11. #4 If you take Canny at first level, it says you get proficiency in a skill if you don’t have it and expertise in that skill. This means if you take it at level 1, you can pick a skill you didn’t have expertise in and start the game at level 1 with 4 skills like a rogue. Why not make it so all rangers get survival with expertise in it along with one other skill from the list in the canny description? You could put it at level 2 if you wanted to discourage dips.
#5 Rangers should get magic weapon.
Of all of these, the poor spell selection and the concentration requirements for ranger damage spells are the most hampering.
All the things generally considered weak about Rangers are addressed in the variant class features UA: Natural explorer, favored enemy, primeval awareness, and hide in plain sight are all situational and generally outclassed by any slightly simulate features of other classes.
Now on to your individual points:
The new optional favored foe feature fixes this by making Hunter's mark not need concentration. The reason they don't work like GFB is because GFB came out after those listed spells and WotC doesn't want to errata a bunch of spells if they can help it.
Flame arrows can be used by multiple characters not just you. Lightning arrow is a little on the weak side (it does comparable damage to a single target as lightning bolt and much less damage to creatures around the target). There is a spell that gives you flexibility in terms of damage type, its called elemental weapon and no one uses it.
Tireless would not be the first class feature to not scale well (second wind anyone?).
Canny does not need a buff, it is one of the best options already.
I have no strong feelings one way or another. Every class could get magic weapon and I feel like it will get used just as frequently as it does now (not very).
Point #1 is actually to make the spells like GFB/BB, not to do what as you point out has been done already in the UA. I get that errata on spells would be annoying, but the cost of bonus action, concentration, and spell slot is way too high.
Re: #4, It’s not a buff to canny but rather recognizing it can be used to add an extra skill when chosen properly and just codifying that.
Thanks for the spell citations too - elemental weapon is new to me and seems pretty underpowered. Magic weapon is nice for making any ranged weapon magical, if you’ve not found one yet.
Just experience and assumptions based on personal opinion. You don't start facing many monsters with non-magic weapon resistance until CR4, by then you usually have magic weapons, but even then those enemies are rare. By the time you need magic weapons more often than not you will be at least level 8 or 9 or nearing their 3 play (level 11-16).
+1 weapons are uncommon and appropriate for characters around level 4 (the same level they only just start rarely being needed), and other magic weapons are common and appropriate for level 1 or 2 characters.
So the spell has very little use in a typical game and is only useful if your DM intentionally withholds magic weapons.
I’m playing a ranger for the first time with 5e and one of my co-players keeps warning me off of them, saying while they’re mostly identical to a fighter at level 1, they will “suck” at higher levels due to lack of scaling. I don’t think this is true, personally, unless your game is pretty munchkin with little exploration or use for utility. In any event, it’s unlikely to be true until at least level 11. Nonetheless, with me playing a ranger and in the wake of the new unearthed arcana class features, the idea of what is “wrong” with the ranger has been on my mind.
I think the class variant features are an interesting attempt. It seems like they’re trying to take the class features that are very DM-dependent (e.g. not getting lost, traveling fast), and replace them with things that have concrete benefits (e.g. tireless, canny, roving). They also attempt to make hunters mark a more permanent fixture contributing to the ranger’s damage via reworking favored enemy into favored foe. I like the rework, especially in that it removes the requirement to concentrate.
#1 So many of the Ranger’s damaging spells have a concentration component to them, and it makes it so that you can never have the advantage of hunters mark and the damaging spell (e.g. Zephyr Strike, Hail of Thorns, Flame Arrows, Lightning Arrow). So here is my first idea - instead of or in addition to making hunter’s mark a class (i.e. non-spell) feature, why would you not make these ranger spells akin to green flame blade? You just make an attack as part of casting the spell.
#2 In addition to the concentration issues, a lot of these spells are just plain crap. To whit, flame arrows allows you to do the same damage as hunters mark, but only 12 times. You can share the fire damage, but it’s limited use and hence not worth the spell slot OR the spells known slot. Lightning arrow does poor damage and a weak ae for a 3rd level spell that the Ranger will get at what? Level 11? How would it hurt the game to do 1d6 more on top of it. T main benefit these spells have over hunters mark is the damage type, so why not make a spell that just lets you dictate the damage type of your arrow as a level 3rd? That would give additional flexibility in terms of damage type.
#3 I really like the concrete bonuses in the unearthed arcana class feature variant piece. I think tireless should scale with level. 1d10 plus wisdom is ridiculously powerful at level 1 but something of an afterthought at level 11.
#4 If you take Canny at first level, it says you get proficiency in a skill if you don’t have it and expertise in that skill. This means if you take it at level 1, you can pick a skill you didn’t have expertise in and start the game at level 1 with 4 skills like a rogue. Why not make it so all rangers get survival with expertise in it along with one other skill from the list in the canny description? You could put it at level 2 if you wanted to discourage dips.
#5 Rangers should get magic weapon.
Of all of these, the poor spell selection and the concentration requirements for ranger damage spells are the most hampering.
All the things generally considered weak about Rangers are addressed in the variant class features UA: Natural explorer, favored enemy, primeval awareness, and hide in plain sight are all situational and generally outclassed by any slightly simulate features of other classes.
Now on to your individual points:
Thanks for the thorough answer.
Point #1 is actually to make the spells like GFB/BB, not to do what as you point out has been done already in the UA. I get that errata on spells would be annoying, but the cost of bonus action, concentration, and spell slot is way too high.
Re: #4, It’s not a buff to canny but rather recognizing it can be used to add an extra skill when chosen properly and just codifying that.
Thanks for the spell citations too - elemental weapon is new to me and seems pretty underpowered. Magic weapon is nice for making any ranged weapon magical, if you’ve not found one yet.
Where do you get your data on spell popularity?
Just experience and assumptions based on personal opinion. You don't start facing many monsters with non-magic weapon resistance until CR4, by then you usually have magic weapons, but even then those enemies are rare. By the time you need magic weapons more often than not you will be at least level 8 or 9 or nearing their 3 play (level 11-16).
+1 weapons are uncommon and appropriate for characters around level 4 (the same level they only just start rarely being needed), and other magic weapons are common and appropriate for level 1 or 2 characters.
So the spell has very little use in a typical game and is only useful if your DM intentionally withholds magic weapons.
I guess I’ve been scarred by life hahaha.