My question is: Does WotC assume that all kinds of environments/terrains can be fit into the 8 or so choices they gave the Ranger (e.g. open sea is covered by coast, wastelands are covered by tundra or desert, so on)? If so, they should have been a bit more clear about that.
Also worth noting is that a particular region can have multiple terrain types. For example, a frozen forest atop a snowy mountain would be forest, tundra, and mountain all at once. Having just one of those as your Favored Terrain would have you covered for that situation.
I'm of the opinion that, in general, choosing grasslands, mountains, and forests as your Favored Terrain options will give you the most bang for your buck. That said, if you assume the terrains include urban environments, Coastal might go up there as well (as most large human settlements would be built along the coast.)
Of course, if you have a particular campaign premise, those should take precedent. Feywild campaigns should absolutely prioritize forests and Dark Sun's harsh environments are completely circumvented by Desert Favored Terrain (+ Outlander background,) for instance.
I think too many people look at the terrain types listed too harshly. It’s not like you can point at a line on the ground and say “On this side is all forest and nothing but forests, and on this side is all mountains and nothing but mountains.” I think it’s WAY more generous and WAY less specific than that. I think, and run as a DM, that having forests as a favored terrain opens the doors to many regions that aren’t specifically in the middle of the swamp, in the middle of the arctic, or deep underground. I think of the choices as more broad strokes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Should the ranger’s natural explorer feature have you choose regions instead types of environments?
My question is: Does WotC assume that all kinds of environments/terrains can be fit into the 8 or so choices they gave the Ranger (e.g. open sea is covered by coast, wastelands are covered by tundra or desert, so on)? If so, they should have been a bit more clear about that.
Also worth noting is that a particular region can have multiple terrain types. For example, a frozen forest atop a snowy mountain would be forest, tundra, and mountain all at once. Having just one of those as your Favored Terrain would have you covered for that situation.
I'm of the opinion that, in general, choosing grasslands, mountains, and forests as your Favored Terrain options will give you the most bang for your buck. That said, if you assume the terrains include urban environments, Coastal might go up there as well (as most large human settlements would be built along the coast.)
Of course, if you have a particular campaign premise, those should take precedent. Feywild campaigns should absolutely prioritize forests and Dark Sun's harsh environments are completely circumvented by Desert Favored Terrain (+ Outlander background,) for instance.
I think too many people look at the terrain types listed too harshly. It’s not like you can point at a line on the ground and say “On this side is all forest and nothing but forests, and on this side is all mountains and nothing but mountains.” I think it’s WAY more generous and WAY less specific than that. I think, and run as a DM, that having forests as a favored terrain opens the doors to many regions that aren’t specifically in the middle of the swamp, in the middle of the arctic, or deep underground. I think of the choices as more broad strokes.