So we know the new 2024 Ranger has some… teething issues to put it mildly. There is however one thing that I’ve noticed that hasn’t come up in the many discussions about the Ranger.
It has already been raised how having Hunter’s Mark baked into the class features, whilst not necessarily a terrible idea on its own, the execution of it has caused significant problems. In this discussion though, I’m primarily looking at the new features (barring Level 1: Favored Enemy) that revolve around Hunter’s Mark:
Level 13: Relentless Hunter
Level 17: Precise Hunter
Level 20: Foe Slayer
Something that I don’t think has been pointed out in discussion is, whilst an argument could be made that Wizard’s is forcing you to play as ‘Hunter’s Mark the Class’, did these new features actually replace something good that existed before? Or are these technically optional features when compared to what came before?
Let’s do a quick break down of what each Ranger gets when we compare the Tasha’s Ranger to the 2024 Ranger (the Tasha’s Ranger I would say is the most ‘up to date’ Ranger from 2014).
PHB - Level 1: Spellcasting
PHB - Level 1: Favored Enemy
You always have the Hunter’s Mark spell prepared.
TCoE - Level 1: Favored Foe
Essentially diet Hunter’s Mark that didn't use a Spell Slot and started with a d4, scaling to a d6 at 6th level and to a d8 at 14th level.
PHB - Level 1: Weapon Mastery
TCoE - Level 1: Deft Explorer - Canny
TCoE - Level 2: Fighting Style
TCoE - Level 2: Spellcasting
PHB - Level 2: Deft Explorer
PHB - Level 2: Fighting Style
TCoE - Level 3: Primal Awareness
PHB - Level 4: Ability Score Improvement
TCoE - Level 4: Ability Score Improvement
PHB - Level 5: Extra Attack
TCoE - Level 5: Extra Attack
PHB - Level 6: Roving
TCoE - Level 6: Deft Explorer - Roving
TCoE - Level 8: Land’s Stride
PHB - Level 9: Expertise
PHB - Level 10: Tireless
TCoE - Level 10: Deft Explorer – Tireless
TCoE - Level 10: Nature’s Veil
PHB - Level 13: Relentless Hunter
Taking damage can’t break your Concentration on Hunter’s Mark.
PHB - Level 14: Nature’s Veil
TCoE - Level 14: Vanish
PHB - Level 17: Precise Hunter
You have Advantage on attack rolls against the creature currently marked by your Hunter’s Mark.
PHB - Level 18: Feral Senses
TCoE - Level 18: Feral Senses
PHB - Level 19: Epic Boon
PHB - Level 20: Foe Slayer
TCoE - Level 20: Foe Slayer
The damage die of your Hunter’s Mark is a d10 rather than a d6.
By comparison, most features are retuning from Tasha’s, either the same, slightly tweaked or changed completely.
What is interesting that I don’t think many people have noticed is that Level 13: Relentless Hunter and Level 17: Precise Hunter did not actually replace any features. Based on this, you could argue that Hunter’s Mark isn’t as baked into the class as first thought. Take Relentless Hunter and Precise Hunter away and you are still playing with the awesome Tasha’s version of the Ranger because you haven’t lost anything. Those features act like optional extras that you can activate should you choose to do so.
Level 20: Foe Slayer did replace a feature that was more or less the same. Foe Slayer is still terrible, and I’m not going to waste text defending it (more like CRAPstone, am I right? Lololol). However, you could argue that in Tasha’s, it worked with an optional feature tied to ‘diet Hunter’s Mark’, and there wasn’t much of a stink kicked up about that. It still wasn’t amazing mind you, but it didn’t provoke the kinds of reaction that is happening with the 2024 Ranger. Also, how many games reach Level 20?
Just food for thought – yes the new Ranger is problematic and I can see many tables homebrewing their own Ranger (Dnd Shorts revision is one I like). However, I find it interesting to note that, if you were to ignore the new Level 13 and Level 17 Class Features, you are essentially just playing a face-lifted Tasha’s Ranger, which most agree was awesome. So maybe the Ranger, whilst deserving of hate, maybe needs to be cut a little slack.
Thoughts?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
#Open D&D
Have the Physical Books? Confused as to why you're not allowed to redeem them for free on D&D Beyond? Questions answered here at the Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You FAQ
Looking to add mouse-over triggered tooltips to such things like magic items, monsters or combat actions? Then dash over to the How to Add Tooltips thread.
Any defense of the 2024 Ranger fails to acknowledge numerous factors:
a.) That the 2024 Ranger nerfs or removes entirely several features that gave the Ranger versatility, its greatest strength in 5e;
b.) That other classes have gained significant and powerful improvements to existing features or new features altogether, while the Ranger has gotten very little themselves.
c.) That the fixation on Hunter's Mark is terrible design because it most empowers one specific type of build (using the Dual Wielder feat) while being much weaker for any other build.
The end result is that if you cared about Ranger for the things that made it its own unique class, the 2024 designers gave you the middle finger and derailed the class to pander solely to DPR optimizers—because they're the only players the designers believe matter for their game.
Great points AutumnalArchfey.
A). I think the issue with this is that it had that in the original 2014 Handbook, but what it had in flavour and individuality, it lost in mechanical benefits. In my view regretfully, the 2014 Ranger sucked, no matter how much flavour it had.
B). Completely agree. I was waiting for the glow up for Ranger. Look at what they did with the other classes; I want to play them all (especially Monk). I think Ranger is the victim of being fixed the most recently with Tasha's. Ironically, had it not been fixed, we might have gotten an even bigger boost for it.
C) Agree again. One fix is just making Hunter's Mark scale, so that it's not so dependant on Duel-Wielder to be effective.
I guess I'm not trying to wholly defend the new Ranger. I just noticed that my argument above hadn't been picked up seemingly anywhere.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
#Open D&D
Have the Physical Books? Confused as to why you're not allowed to redeem them for free on D&D Beyond? Questions answered here at the Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You FAQ
Looking to add mouse-over triggered tooltips to such things like magic items, monsters or combat actions? Then dash over to the How to Add Tooltips thread.
I actually don't think building on Hunter's Mark. Is that bad.
It's essentially extra damage per hit. So to get the most out of this multiplicatively you either want more hits aka twf. Or better chances to hit.aka archery FS.
The design supports the iconic fighting styles. Whereas something like dueling or swinging a bigger and slower weapon where you might miss more and not get on hit damage. Yea those aren't as good.
What's really lacking here is a go to lvl 4 and 5 spells slots use you can use in conjunction with HM
I don't understand why they didn't just drop concentration on Hunter's Mark at level 13. They said concentration-less Hunter's Mark was too strong due to multiclass dipping issues, but if someone is going 13 levels into Ranger then it's not a dip anymore. It's a massive commitment.
Combining Hunter's Mark with Swift Quiver would be a big damage boost for ranged rangers. Melee rangers could get some mileage from Guardian of Nature or Conjure Woodland Beings. It'd come online around the level Rangers need a damage boost to stay relevant. Seems like the ideal solution to me.
They also could've used Hunter's Mark to improve the class' flavor by giving Ranger unique ways of using it.
Have Favored Enemy also provide the benefit that allows rangers to cast it on tracks they find using the Survival skill with an unlimited range. This would let rangers get an Exploration boon from the spell as well as reward the ranger with a combat advantage for playing like a ranger. You search for tracks, find them, get a bonus to further tracking checks, and when you find the creature that left the tracks you get to start combat with Hunter's Mark already cast, relieving the Bonus Action issues rangers have.
Maybe have Hunter's Mark lose the Vocal component at levels 6 or 9 as well so that the ranger can cast it while sneaking without giving away their position.
Just these small changes to Hunter's Mark would boost the ranger in the areas it needs boosting while providing a unique playstyle that suits the ranger archetype in a way other classes can't fully replicate.
Having Hunters mark go concentrationless at L13 would be semi nice. The problem is that by then most campaigns are winding down or over. Having it go concentrationless at L6 makes it very nice. You’re not dipping at 6 levels any more than you are at 13 and now you actually have time to use it with other spells. I like the verballess idea as well but more being able to cast it on tracks/spoor/etc and then track the creature. Other things I would love to see is flipping when the single and double expertises occur. Ranger really should be able to take two expertises early on ( nature and survival?) and then add one more later, not get one early and two later. Of course they really should be getting the jack of all trades ability to cover all the different things they would have to be able to do surviving alone out in the wilderness.
Having Hunters mark go concentrationless at L13 would be semi nice. The problem is that by then most campaigns are winding down or over. Having it go concentrationless at L6 makes it very nice. You’re not dipping at 6 levels any more than you are at 13 and now you actually have time to use it with other spells. I like the verballess idea as well but more being able to cast it on tracks/spoor/etc and then track the creature. Other things I would love to see is flipping when the single and double expertises occur. Ranger really should be able to take two expertises early on ( nature and survival?) and then add one more later, not get one early and two later. Of course they really should be getting the jack of all trades ability to cover all the different things they would have to be able to do surviving alone out in the wilderness.
Earlier is always better. I only suggest the 13th level because Ranger does pretty good single-target damage in tiers 1 and 2 already. Tiers 3 and 4 are where they fall off the hardest. It's also where they pick up the level 4 and 5 spells with concentration that most heavily compete with Hunter's Mark directly. So if we want to fix the late-game DPR problem that seems the best place for it.
Rangers in tiers 1 and 2 have more of a flavor problem, which can largely be solved by just making Hunter's Mark a more fun ability. Something you have reason to cast beyond the small damage boost it offers.
I agree about the expertise. They gave Ranger 1 expertise less than Rogue or Bard and gave them two languages instead. I like the languages, don't get me wrong. It's nice flavor. I just don't see why Ranger needed to take a hit in the expertise department to get them. Being able to start the game with Expertise in both Stealth and Survival would go a long way to making playing a stealthy wilderness explorer from the start much easier.
Yeah, I’m not as worried about the tier 3/4 dpr as you should be using spells for damage and control by then. But having everything concentration based is defeating that purpose. Getting concentrationless HM earlier let’s you start leaning into that spell use so the switchover is more gradual and less mindwrenching. A Wizard has 8 more slots than a ranger at L20 - all level 5+ while the ranger has his AC and melee/ ranged attacks and damage stead. Given that a TWF ranger has the potential for 4 attacks a round from level 5 on without burning limited resources (granted with light weapons) I think that is a fairly even trade off.
The flavor problem is, to some extent, our problem not the class’s. We , between the many of us, have such varied ideas about what a ranger should be that it’s hard to figure out just what flavors a ranger should have. Personally, mine is based on stories of the mountainman and long hunters of the early 1800s along with my own experiences with survival camping and general hiking, camping and geology field work.
I have never really understood the reasoning behind giving the bard jack of all trades. 3 expertises and 3-6 instruments should really be all they need. If they want more giving them performance and history automatically and then let them take 3 more skills or giving them the skilled feat at level 1 should do fine. On the other hand it makes sense for rangers ( or at least my vision of them) to get jack of all trades. To survive alone in the wilderness you need most of the skills so having half proficiency in any you don’t have full proficiency or expertise in makes since. Even arcana since they are spellcasters.
I don't fully agree that the ranger does not have a solid enough class identity. If anything it is loads more specific than "fighter". The difference is that the fighter's mechanics allow for a level of customizability where it's easy to make it fit anything from a loyal knight to a longbowman.
Part of the problem is that anyone can step on the ranger's toes if they have expertise in Survival. An easy fix to that is to also give rangers expertise in Survival on top of some other mechanics that make them excel in the wild. Hunter's Mark tries to do this with its tracking trick but falls short because there's no opportunity to put it on something you want to track. Make it castable while sneaking and make it better as a tracking spell and suddenly ranger has a spell that caters to that part of the class fantasy.
The other problem is that 2024 ranger feels forced into a narrow range of roles in a way other classes don't. The biggest complaint is feeling compelled to cast Hunter's Mark in place of more fun spells. Making Hunter's Mark more fun on its own and making it able to overlap with the rest of the spell list fixes that. For my part I am upset I can't make a good STRanger build anymore. Making a ton of features not scale off WIS would help with that. As would giving Ranger an anti-MAD mechanic like what Barbarians and Monks get so they can fight effectively with or without armor.
I believe the problem is the failure to redesign Hunter's Mark itself. First, make it a Class Feature with no concentration and used as part of an attack roll, instead of a spell that uses concentration on your bonus action. Limit multiclass exploits by linking the feature's improvements to Ranger level. Second, have the damage only apply once per turn. This would even out it's efficacy for single weapon, great weapon, dual wield, & ranged. Third, make the damage scale with Ranger level: d6 in T1, 2d6 in T2, 3d6 in T3, and 4d6 in T4.
But also: on top of just damage, the Mark could give benefits to defence and accuracy, reflecting the Ranger's knowledge of and/or focus upon the single creature. This could manifest as a boost to AC and/or Saves vs the creature, as well as a bonus To Hit and/or Advantage. These improvements could be gained as features as you level up in Ranger. It could be something like adding your Wisdom modifier to your AC for a turn as a reaction (similar to a Shield spell) a limited number of times per day, or adding your Wis mod to your Saves a limited number of times per day. Advantage Wis mod times/day. Or maybe, you could choose from among those options Wis mod times per day.
All of this, as class features, concentration free. But only against one creature that you've "marked", and you can only Mark a limited number of times per day. Perhaps regaining a number of Marks w a Short Rest. In this way, you'd be able to use your Ranger spells as you like. And sure, using some of the spells on top of this form of Hunter's Mark could see the Ranger have higher single target, single round damage increases with spells like Hail of Thorns or some of the other more multi-target spells like Lightning Arrow, Steel Wind Strike, or Conjure Barrage or Volley. But how would that be much different from other burst damage effects like Paladin'a Smite or Rogue Sneak Attack? The Mark damage would only affect the one creature Marked, while any other creatures hit by those multi-target spells would only receive the spell's damage.
I think the tracking/Survival part of the Hunter's Mark spell should be separated from it. That should be baked into the Ranger's skills. In addition to possible proficiency & expertise, allow Rangers to have Advantage on certain skill or tool checks a limited number of times per day.
Anyway. I think it would be worth exploring this or something like it in a playtest. Honestly, the rest of Ranger is pretty good as is. It's really just the Hunter's Mark features that need adjusting: *Using your concentration and your bonus action. *Not really scaling the damage as you level. *Linking the damage to each hit, which encourages playing a style that maximizes your number of attacks. *Having its improvements come online at Levels 13, 17, & 20, which is way too late.
I actually don't think building on Hunter's Mark. Is that bad.
It's essentially extra damage per hit. So to get the most out of this multiplicatively you either want more hits aka twf. Or better chances to hit.aka archery FS.
The design supports the iconic fighting styles. Whereas something like dueling or swinging a bigger and slower weapon where you might miss more and not get on hit damage. Yea those aren't as good.
What's really lacking here is a go to lvl 4 and 5 spells slots use you can use in conjunction with HM
It is not that bad if you like the Hunter's Mark spell and want to build a character that leans into that build style. Personally I don't find DPR-focused Rangers appealing, and that is all HM really does effectively is DPR (in 12 years of playing I have never used the Wisdom benefit at all).
Concentration-free Hunter's Mark at level 13 does almost nothing for me. Even if I have the free cast, at that level and above, I usually don't want to spend the bonus action to cast it (or move it), when I could use that bonus action for something else instead.
I actually don't think building on Hunter's Mark. Is that bad.
It's essentially extra damage per hit. So to get the most out of this multiplicatively you either want more hits aka twf. Or better chances to hit.aka archery FS.
The design supports the iconic fighting styles. Whereas something like dueling or swinging a bigger and slower weapon where you might miss more and not get on hit damage. Yea those aren't as good.
What's really lacking here is a go to lvl 4 and 5 spells slots use you can use in conjunction with HM
It is not that bad if you like the Hunter's Mark spell and want to build a character that leans into that build style. Personally I don't find DPR-focused Rangers appealing, and that is all HM really does effectively is DPR (in 12 years of playing I have never used the Wisdom benefit at all).
Concentration-free Hunter's Mark at level 13 does almost nothing for me. Even if I have the free cast, at that level and above, I usually don't want to spend the bonus action to cast it (or move it), when I could use that bonus action for something else instead.
How many things are you using that bonus action for? Most of them will be a lot worse than 9.1 average dpr for every turn after. (65% hit rate, dual wielding for 4 attacks)
I actually don't think building on Hunter's Mark. Is that bad.
It's essentially extra damage per hit. So to get the most out of this multiplicatively you either want more hits aka twf. Or better chances to hit.aka archery FS.
The design supports the iconic fighting styles. Whereas something like dueling or swinging a bigger and slower weapon where you might miss more and not get on hit damage. Yea those aren't as good.
What's really lacking here is a go to lvl 4 and 5 spells slots use you can use in conjunction with HM
It is not that bad if you like the Hunter's Mark spell and want to build a character that leans into that build style. Personally I don't find DPR-focused Rangers appealing, and that is all HM really does effectively is DPR (in 12 years of playing I have never used the Wisdom benefit at all).
Concentration-free Hunter's Mark at level 13 does almost nothing for me. Even if I have the free cast, at that level and above, I usually don't want to spend the bonus action to cast it (or move it), when I could use that bonus action for something else instead.
How many things are you using that bonus action for? Most of them will be a lot worse than 9.1 average dpr for every turn after. (65% hit rate, dual wielding for 4 attacks)
I am using it for a lot.
To start with it is not 9.1 DPR with a .65% hit rate. It is 7.9 if you are attacking every single round because about 50% of the time you are using your bonus action to move your Hunter's Mark.
What is better than this? Realize we are talking level 13+ here - so you have a Beast Action, Nature's Veil, Misty Step, upcast Hail of Thorns, Lightning Arrow, Swift Quiver, drinking a potion (which you typically have a lot of at this level), Guardian of Nature, Grasping Vine ..... and that is before you get into species, feats and 2014 subclasses.
All of those are generally better than 7.9 DPR, they are even better than 9.1 DPR and those numbers are if you are playing a DPR optimized build. I will add Jump to the above, it is not strictly better than 9.1 DPR, but it is comparable, situationally better and situationally worse.
Note in what you quoted I said "It is not that bad if you like the Hunter's Mark spell and want to build a character that leans into that build style." A dual wielder-nick build definitely "leans into" that play style and HM is not bad for that character. At 13th level there are often better things to do with a bonus action, but it is still not bad, however the things I mention above are WAY, WAY, better if you are not playing a DPR-focused build optimized for this.
For example, I am playing a 14th level Dragonborn Fey Wanderer right now, I have a 16 Dexterity. I only take the attack action around 50% of the time, and sometimes when I take it, I am trading one attack for a Breath Weapon (usually Dragonfear). I don't have the dual wielding feat. Not accounting breath weapon use, that is less than 3 DPR for me (3 attacks per round with nick, attacking 50% of the time, 55% hit rate).
This is a really good video on how HM is still bad in 2024:
I actually don't think building on Hunter's Mark. Is that bad.
It's essentially extra damage per hit. So to get the most out of this multiplicatively you either want more hits aka twf. Or better chances to hit.aka archery FS.
The design supports the iconic fighting styles. Whereas something like dueling or swinging a bigger and slower weapon where you might miss more and not get on hit damage. Yea those aren't as good.
What's really lacking here is a go to lvl 4 and 5 spells slots use you can use in conjunction with HM
It is not that bad if you like the Hunter's Mark spell and want to build a character that leans into that build style. Personally I don't find DPR-focused Rangers appealing, and that is all HM really does effectively is DPR (in 12 years of playing I have never used the Wisdom benefit at all).
Concentration-free Hunter's Mark at level 13 does almost nothing for me. Even if I have the free cast, at that level and above, I usually don't want to spend the bonus action to cast it (or move it), when I could use that bonus action for something else instead.
How many things are you using that bonus action for? Most of them will be a lot worse than 9.1 average dpr for every turn after. (65% hit rate, dual wielding for 4 attacks)
I am using it for a lot.
To start with it is not 9.1 DPR with a .65% hit rate. It is 7.9 if you are attacking every single round because about 50% of the time you are using your bonus action to move your Hunter's Mark.
What is better than this? Realize we are talking level 13+ here - so you have a Beast Action, Nature's Veil, Misty Step, upcast Hail of Thorns, Lightning Arrow, Swift Quiver, drinking a potion (which you typically have a lot of at this level), Guardian of Nature, Grasping Vine .....
All of those are generally better than 7.9 DPR, they are even better than 9.1 DPR and those numbers are if you are playing a DPR optimized build. I will add Jump to the above, it is not strictly better than 9.1 DPR, but it is comparable, situationally better and situationally worse. Those things are better/comparable if you are playing a DPR build but they are WAY, WAY, better if you are not playing a DPR-focused build optimized for this.
I am playing a 14th level Dragonborn Fey Wanderer right now, I have a 16 Dexterity and I only take the attack action probably 50% of the time, and sometimes when I take it, I am trading one attack for a Breath Weapon (usually Dragonfear). I don't have the dual wielding feat. Not counting breath weapon use, that is less than 3 DPR for me (3 attacks per round, attacking 50% of the time, with nick 55% hit rate).
This is a really good video on what a waste HM is:
You can't really correct someone by pulling a number out of conjecture, though your point is acknowledged.
Sure you have other options, but those are mostly limited features or high level spells. Hunter's mark is basically free at that point. (also, hunters mark is usually better than upcasted hail of thorns and it would synergize very well with swift quiver if it wasn't concentration).
You say you only take the attack action about half the time. I assume you are casting a spell most of the other half of the time. If that is true, you can't cast any spells as a your bonus action... except hunter's mark.
I actually don't think building on Hunter's Mark. Is that bad.
It's essentially extra damage per hit. So to get the most out of this multiplicatively you either want more hits aka twf. Or better chances to hit.aka archery FS.
The design supports the iconic fighting styles. Whereas something like dueling or swinging a bigger and slower weapon where you might miss more and not get on hit damage. Yea those aren't as good.
What's really lacking here is a go to lvl 4 and 5 spells slots use you can use in conjunction with HM
It is not that bad if you like the Hunter's Mark spell and want to build a character that leans into that build style. Personally I don't find DPR-focused Rangers appealing, and that is all HM really does effectively is DPR (in 12 years of playing I have never used the Wisdom benefit at all).
Concentration-free Hunter's Mark at level 13 does almost nothing for me. Even if I have the free cast, at that level and above, I usually don't want to spend the bonus action to cast it (or move it), when I could use that bonus action for something else instead.
How many things are you using that bonus action for? Most of them will be a lot worse than 9.1 average dpr for every turn after. (65% hit rate, dual wielding for 4 attacks)
I am using it for a lot.
To start with it is not 9.1 DPR with a .65% hit rate. It is 7.9 if you are attacking every single round because about 50% of the time you are using your bonus action to move your Hunter's Mark.
What is better than this? Realize we are talking level 13+ here - so you have a Beast Action, Nature's Veil, Misty Step, upcast Hail of Thorns, Lightning Arrow, Swift Quiver, drinking a potion (which you typically have a lot of at this level), Guardian of Nature, Grasping Vine .....
All of those are generally better than 7.9 DPR, they are even better than 9.1 DPR and those numbers are if you are playing a DPR optimized build. I will add Jump to the above, it is not strictly better than 9.1 DPR, but it is comparable, situationally better and situationally worse. Those things are better/comparable if you are playing a DPR build but they are WAY, WAY, better if you are not playing a DPR-focused build optimized for this.
I am playing a 14th level Dragonborn Fey Wanderer right now, I have a 16 Dexterity and I only take the attack action probably 50% of the time, and sometimes when I take it, I am trading one attack for a Breath Weapon (usually Dragonfear). I don't have the dual wielding feat. Not counting breath weapon use, that is less than 3 DPR for me (3 attacks per round, attacking 50% of the time, with nick 55% hit rate).
This is a really good video on what a waste HM is:
You can't really correct someone by pulling a number out of conjecture, though your point is acknowledged.
Sure you have other options, but those are mostly limited features or high level spells. Hunter's mark is basically free at that point. (also, hunters mark is usually better than upcasted hail of thorns and it would synergize very well with swift quiver if it wasn't concentration).
I am not the one who pulled a number out of conjecture, I just corrected the number that was pulled out of conjecture to more accurately represent actual play.
Even without concentration, Hunter's Mark is not free because it uses a bonus action. Nature's Veil 5 times a day and you have a minimum of 11 spell slots at 13th level. Then you have potions on top of that and in many cases more from subclass abilities and feats.
How many bonus actions do you have during combat in a day? At 13th level and higher that you are usually going to have something better to do. Sure when you have nothing else to do with your bonus HM is better than nothing, but that is not going to be often at this level.
You say you only take the attack action about half the time. I assume you are casting a spell most of the other half of the time.
Use Wand of Fear, Use pipes of haunting, read a scroll, Use wand of paralyzation, cast a spell .....
Throwing (nick) my Dragontooth Dagger, Dagger of Venom and +1 Dagger nets me 3d4+3+6 piercing +1d6 acid+1d6 psychic all with a +9 attack roll. That is 23.5 Damage average assuming all 3 hit. I am throwing those daggers with disadvantage at anything beyond 20 feet and I can only do that one round before I am out of magic daggers. Throwing daggers a second round my damage drops to 17 with a +8 attack and there is the problem of the enemy picking up my magic daggers and using them against me.
Using Truestrike with my +2 Heavy Crossbow is getting me 1d10+2d6+7 piercing/radiant+1d6 psychic which is 23, slightly less, but I have a +12 attack roll, I can do it out to 100 feet without disadvantage, and I can do it round after round and if I want even more extra damage I can use a bonus action on hail of thorns and damage multiple enemies.
If I assume an AC of 18, the targets are within 20 feet and consider criticals the damage throwing my magic daggers is 16, using the daggers in melee is 18 (because I attack with the dragontooth twice). Using my crossbow with Truestrike is 18, using truestrike-staff of striking (+13 attack) is 20.
That is just if I want to damage someone, which I don't do all the time.
If that is true, you can't cast any spells as a your bonus action... except hunter's mark
I can cast another spell as long as I did not use a spell slot to cast a spell with an action or vice versa. I can cast the following spells without a spell slot:
Truestrike (at will)
Friends (at will)
Cause Fear (once a day)
Invisibility (once a day)
Wrathful Smite (once a day)
Summon Fey (once a day)
Fear (twice a day).
Next level I will be able to cast Misty Step 5 times a day without using a slot.
In addition to all these, I can use scrolls to cast a spell.
And that does not even consider all the non-spells I can use.
So we know the new 2024 Ranger has some… teething issues to put it mildly. There is however one thing that I’ve noticed that hasn’t come up in the many discussions about the Ranger.
It has already been raised how having Hunter’s Mark baked into the class features, whilst not necessarily a terrible idea on its own, the execution of it has caused significant problems. In this discussion though, I’m primarily looking at the new features (barring Level 1: Favored Enemy) that revolve around Hunter’s Mark:
Level 13: Relentless Hunter
Level 17: Precise Hunter
Level 20: Foe Slayer
Something that I don’t think has been pointed out in discussion is, whilst an argument could be made that Wizard’s is forcing you to play as ‘Hunter’s Mark the Class’, did these new features actually replace something good that existed before? Or are these technically optional features when compared to what came before?
Let’s do a quick break down of what each Ranger gets when we compare the Tasha’s Ranger to the 2024 Ranger (the Tasha’s Ranger I would say is the most ‘up to date’ Ranger from 2014).
PHB - Level 1: Spellcasting
PHB - Level 1: Favored Enemy
You always have the Hunter’s Mark spell prepared.
TCoE - Level 1: Favored Foe
Essentially diet Hunter’s Mark that didn't use a Spell Slot and started with a d4, scaling to a d6 at 6th level and to a d8 at 14th level.
PHB - Level 1: Weapon Mastery
TCoE - Level 1: Deft Explorer - Canny
TCoE - Level 2: Fighting Style
TCoE - Level 2: Spellcasting
PHB - Level 2: Deft Explorer
PHB - Level 2: Fighting Style
TCoE - Level 3: Primal Awareness
PHB - Level 4: Ability Score Improvement
TCoE - Level 4: Ability Score Improvement
PHB - Level 5: Extra Attack
TCoE - Level 5: Extra Attack
PHB - Level 6: Roving
TCoE - Level 6: Deft Explorer - Roving
TCoE - Level 8: Land’s Stride
PHB - Level 9: Expertise
PHB - Level 10: Tireless
TCoE - Level 10: Deft Explorer – Tireless
TCoE - Level 10: Nature’s Veil
PHB - Level 13: Relentless Hunter
Taking damage can’t break your Concentration on Hunter’s Mark.
PHB - Level 14: Nature’s Veil
TCoE - Level 14: Vanish
PHB - Level 17: Precise Hunter
You have Advantage on attack rolls against the creature currently marked by your Hunter’s Mark.
PHB - Level 18: Feral Senses
TCoE - Level 18: Feral Senses
PHB - Level 19: Epic Boon
PHB - Level 20: Foe Slayer
TCoE - Level 20: Foe Slayer
The damage die of your Hunter’s Mark is a d10 rather than a d6.
By comparison, most features are retuning from Tasha’s, either the same, slightly tweaked or changed completely.
What is interesting that I don’t think many people have noticed is that Level 13: Relentless Hunter and Level 17: Precise Hunter did not actually replace any features. Based on this, you could argue that Hunter’s Mark isn’t as baked into the class as first thought. Take Relentless Hunter and Precise Hunter away and you are still playing with the awesome Tasha’s version of the Ranger because you haven’t lost anything. Those features act like optional extras that you can activate should you choose to do so.
Level 20: Foe Slayer did replace a feature that was more or less the same. Foe Slayer is still terrible, and I’m not going to waste text defending it (more like CRAPstone, am I right? Lololol). However, you could argue that in Tasha’s, it worked with an optional feature tied to ‘diet Hunter’s Mark’, and there wasn’t much of a stink kicked up about that. It still wasn’t amazing mind you, but it didn’t provoke the kinds of reaction that is happening with the 2024 Ranger. Also, how many games reach Level 20?
Just food for thought – yes the new Ranger is problematic and I can see many tables homebrewing their own Ranger (Dnd Shorts revision is one I like). However, I find it interesting to note that, if you were to ignore the new Level 13 and Level 17 Class Features, you are essentially just playing a face-lifted Tasha’s Ranger, which most agree was awesome. So maybe the Ranger, whilst deserving of hate, maybe needs to be cut a little slack.
Thoughts?
#Open D&D
Have the Physical Books? Confused as to why you're not allowed to redeem them for free on D&D Beyond? Questions answered here at the Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You FAQ
Looking to add mouse-over triggered tooltips to such things like magic items, monsters or combat actions? Then dash over to the How to Add Tooltips thread.
Agreed
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Great points AutumnalArchfey.
A). I think the issue with this is that it had that in the original 2014 Handbook, but what it had in flavour and individuality, it lost in mechanical benefits. In my view regretfully, the 2014 Ranger sucked, no matter how much flavour it had.
B). Completely agree. I was waiting for the glow up for Ranger. Look at what they did with the other classes; I want to play them all (especially Monk). I think Ranger is the victim of being fixed the most recently with Tasha's. Ironically, had it not been fixed, we might have gotten an even bigger boost for it.
C) Agree again. One fix is just making Hunter's Mark scale, so that it's not so dependant on Duel-Wielder to be effective.
I guess I'm not trying to wholly defend the new Ranger. I just noticed that my argument above hadn't been picked up seemingly anywhere.
#Open D&D
Have the Physical Books? Confused as to why you're not allowed to redeem them for free on D&D Beyond? Questions answered here at the Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You FAQ
Looking to add mouse-over triggered tooltips to such things like magic items, monsters or combat actions? Then dash over to the How to Add Tooltips thread.
I actually don't think building on Hunter's Mark. Is that bad.
It's essentially extra damage per hit. So to get the most out of this multiplicatively you either want more hits aka twf. Or better chances to hit.aka archery FS.
The design supports the iconic fighting styles. Whereas something like dueling or swinging a bigger and slower weapon where you might miss more and not get on hit damage. Yea those aren't as good.
What's really lacking here is a go to lvl 4 and 5 spells slots use you can use in conjunction with HM
I don't understand why they didn't just drop concentration on Hunter's Mark at level 13. They said concentration-less Hunter's Mark was too strong due to multiclass dipping issues, but if someone is going 13 levels into Ranger then it's not a dip anymore. It's a massive commitment.
Combining Hunter's Mark with Swift Quiver would be a big damage boost for ranged rangers. Melee rangers could get some mileage from Guardian of Nature or Conjure Woodland Beings. It'd come online around the level Rangers need a damage boost to stay relevant. Seems like the ideal solution to me.
They also could've used Hunter's Mark to improve the class' flavor by giving Ranger unique ways of using it.
Have Favored Enemy also provide the benefit that allows rangers to cast it on tracks they find using the Survival skill with an unlimited range. This would let rangers get an Exploration boon from the spell as well as reward the ranger with a combat advantage for playing like a ranger. You search for tracks, find them, get a bonus to further tracking checks, and when you find the creature that left the tracks you get to start combat with Hunter's Mark already cast, relieving the Bonus Action issues rangers have.
Maybe have Hunter's Mark lose the Vocal component at levels 6 or 9 as well so that the ranger can cast it while sneaking without giving away their position.
Just these small changes to Hunter's Mark would boost the ranger in the areas it needs boosting while providing a unique playstyle that suits the ranger archetype in a way other classes can't fully replicate.
Having Hunters mark go concentrationless at L13 would be semi nice. The problem is that by then most campaigns are winding down or over. Having it go concentrationless at L6 makes it very nice. You’re not dipping at 6 levels any more than you are at 13 and now you actually have time to use it with other spells. I like the verballess idea as well but more being able to cast it on tracks/spoor/etc and then track the creature. Other things I would love to see is flipping when the single and double expertises occur. Ranger really should be able to take two expertises early on ( nature and survival?) and then add one more later, not get one early and two later. Of course they really should be getting the jack of all trades ability to cover all the different things they would have to be able to do surviving alone out in the wilderness.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Earlier is always better. I only suggest the 13th level because Ranger does pretty good single-target damage in tiers 1 and 2 already. Tiers 3 and 4 are where they fall off the hardest. It's also where they pick up the level 4 and 5 spells with concentration that most heavily compete with Hunter's Mark directly. So if we want to fix the late-game DPR problem that seems the best place for it.
Rangers in tiers 1 and 2 have more of a flavor problem, which can largely be solved by just making Hunter's Mark a more fun ability. Something you have reason to cast beyond the small damage boost it offers.
I agree about the expertise. They gave Ranger 1 expertise less than Rogue or Bard and gave them two languages instead. I like the languages, don't get me wrong. It's nice flavor. I just don't see why Ranger needed to take a hit in the expertise department to get them. Being able to start the game with Expertise in both Stealth and Survival would go a long way to making playing a stealthy wilderness explorer from the start much easier.
Yeah, I’m not as worried about the tier 3/4 dpr as you should be using spells for damage and control by then. But having everything concentration based is defeating that purpose. Getting concentrationless HM earlier let’s you start leaning into that spell use so the switchover is more gradual and less mindwrenching. A Wizard has 8 more slots than a ranger at L20 - all level 5+ while the ranger has his AC and melee/ ranged attacks and damage stead. Given that a TWF ranger has the potential for 4 attacks a round from level 5 on without burning limited resources (granted with light weapons) I think that is a fairly even trade off.
The flavor problem is, to some extent, our problem not the class’s. We , between the many of us, have such varied ideas about what a ranger should be that it’s hard to figure out just what flavors a ranger should have. Personally, mine is based on stories of the mountainman and long hunters of the early 1800s along with my own experiences with survival camping and general hiking, camping and geology field work.
I have never really understood the reasoning behind giving the bard jack of all trades. 3 expertises and 3-6 instruments should really be all they need. If they want more giving them performance and history automatically and then let them take 3 more skills or giving them the skilled feat at level 1 should do fine. On the other hand it makes sense for rangers ( or at least my vision of them) to get jack of all trades. To survive alone in the wilderness you need most of the skills so having half proficiency in any you don’t have full proficiency or expertise in makes since. Even arcana since they are spellcasters.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
I don't fully agree that the ranger does not have a solid enough class identity. If anything it is loads more specific than "fighter". The difference is that the fighter's mechanics allow for a level of customizability where it's easy to make it fit anything from a loyal knight to a longbowman.
Part of the problem is that anyone can step on the ranger's toes if they have expertise in Survival. An easy fix to that is to also give rangers expertise in Survival on top of some other mechanics that make them excel in the wild. Hunter's Mark tries to do this with its tracking trick but falls short because there's no opportunity to put it on something you want to track. Make it castable while sneaking and make it better as a tracking spell and suddenly ranger has a spell that caters to that part of the class fantasy.
The other problem is that 2024 ranger feels forced into a narrow range of roles in a way other classes don't. The biggest complaint is feeling compelled to cast Hunter's Mark in place of more fun spells. Making Hunter's Mark more fun on its own and making it able to overlap with the rest of the spell list fixes that. For my part I am upset I can't make a good STRanger build anymore. Making a ton of features not scale off WIS would help with that. As would giving Ranger an anti-MAD mechanic like what Barbarians and Monks get so they can fight effectively with or without armor.
I believe the problem is the failure to redesign Hunter's Mark itself. First, make it a Class Feature with no concentration and used as part of an attack roll, instead of a spell that uses concentration on your bonus action. Limit multiclass exploits by linking the feature's improvements to Ranger level. Second, have the damage only apply once per turn. This would even out it's efficacy for single weapon, great weapon, dual wield, & ranged. Third, make the damage scale with Ranger level: d6 in T1, 2d6 in T2, 3d6 in T3, and 4d6 in T4.
But also: on top of just damage, the Mark could give benefits to defence and accuracy, reflecting the Ranger's knowledge of and/or focus upon the single creature. This could manifest as a boost to AC and/or Saves vs the creature, as well as a bonus To Hit and/or Advantage. These improvements could be gained as features as you level up in Ranger. It could be something like adding your Wisdom modifier to your AC for a turn as a reaction (similar to a Shield spell) a limited number of times per day, or adding your Wis mod to your Saves a limited number of times per day. Advantage Wis mod times/day. Or maybe, you could choose from among those options Wis mod times per day.
All of this, as class features, concentration free. But only against one creature that you've "marked", and you can only Mark a limited number of times per day. Perhaps regaining a number of Marks w a Short Rest. In this way, you'd be able to use your Ranger spells as you like. And sure, using some of the spells on top of this form of Hunter's Mark could see the Ranger have higher single target, single round damage increases with spells like Hail of Thorns or some of the other more multi-target spells like Lightning Arrow, Steel Wind Strike, or Conjure Barrage or Volley. But how would that be much different from other burst damage effects like Paladin'a Smite or Rogue Sneak Attack? The Mark damage would only affect the one creature Marked, while any other creatures hit by those multi-target spells would only receive the spell's damage.
I think the tracking/Survival part of the Hunter's Mark spell should be separated from it. That should be baked into the Ranger's skills. In addition to possible proficiency & expertise, allow Rangers to have Advantage on certain skill or tool checks a limited number of times per day.
Anyway. I think it would be worth exploring this or something like it in a playtest. Honestly, the rest of Ranger is pretty good as is. It's really just the Hunter's Mark features that need adjusting: *Using your concentration and your bonus action. *Not really scaling the damage as you level. *Linking the damage to each hit, which encourages playing a style that maximizes your number of attacks. *Having its improvements come online at Levels 13, 17, & 20, which is way too late.
It is not that bad if you like the Hunter's Mark spell and want to build a character that leans into that build style. Personally I don't find DPR-focused Rangers appealing, and that is all HM really does effectively is DPR (in 12 years of playing I have never used the Wisdom benefit at all).
Concentration-free Hunter's Mark at level 13 does almost nothing for me. Even if I have the free cast, at that level and above, I usually don't want to spend the bonus action to cast it (or move it), when I could use that bonus action for something else instead.
How many things are you using that bonus action for? Most of them will be a lot worse than 9.1 average dpr for every turn after. (65% hit rate, dual wielding for 4 attacks)
I am using it for a lot.
To start with it is not 9.1 DPR with a .65% hit rate. It is 7.9 if you are attacking every single round because about 50% of the time you are using your bonus action to move your Hunter's Mark.
What is better than this? Realize we are talking level 13+ here - so you have a Beast Action, Nature's Veil, Misty Step, upcast Hail of Thorns, Lightning Arrow, Swift Quiver, drinking a potion (which you typically have a lot of at this level), Guardian of Nature, Grasping Vine ..... and that is before you get into species, feats and 2014 subclasses.
All of those are generally better than 7.9 DPR, they are even better than 9.1 DPR and those numbers are if you are playing a DPR optimized build. I will add Jump to the above, it is not strictly better than 9.1 DPR, but it is comparable, situationally better and situationally worse.
Note in what you quoted I said "It is not that bad if you like the Hunter's Mark spell and want to build a character that leans into that build style." A dual wielder-nick build definitely "leans into" that play style and HM is not bad for that character. At 13th level there are often better things to do with a bonus action, but it is still not bad, however the things I mention above are WAY, WAY, better if you are not playing a DPR-focused build optimized for this.
For example, I am playing a 14th level Dragonborn Fey Wanderer right now, I have a 16 Dexterity. I only take the attack action around 50% of the time, and sometimes when I take it, I am trading one attack for a Breath Weapon (usually Dragonfear). I don't have the dual wielding feat. Not accounting breath weapon use, that is less than 3 DPR for me (3 attacks per round with nick, attacking 50% of the time, 55% hit rate).
This is a really good video on how HM is still bad in 2024:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVDuzwKqzpA
You can't really correct someone by pulling a number out of conjecture, though your point is acknowledged.
Sure you have other options, but those are mostly limited features or high level spells. Hunter's mark is basically free at that point. (also, hunters mark is usually better than upcasted hail of thorns and it would synergize very well with swift quiver if it wasn't concentration).
You say you only take the attack action about half the time. I assume you are casting a spell most of the other half of the time. If that is true, you can't cast any spells as a your bonus action... except hunter's mark.
I am not the one who pulled a number out of conjecture, I just corrected the number that was pulled out of conjecture to more accurately represent actual play.
Even without concentration, Hunter's Mark is not free because it uses a bonus action. Nature's Veil 5 times a day and you have a minimum of 11 spell slots at 13th level. Then you have potions on top of that and in many cases more from subclass abilities and feats.
How many bonus actions do you have during combat in a day? At 13th level and higher that you are usually going to have something better to do. Sure when you have nothing else to do with your bonus HM is better than nothing, but that is not going to be often at this level.
Use Wand of Fear, Use pipes of haunting, read a scroll, Use wand of paralyzation, cast a spell .....
Throwing (nick) my Dragontooth Dagger, Dagger of Venom and +1 Dagger nets me 3d4+3+6 piercing +1d6 acid+1d6 psychic all with a +9 attack roll. That is 23.5 Damage average assuming all 3 hit. I am throwing those daggers with disadvantage at anything beyond 20 feet and I can only do that one round before I am out of magic daggers. Throwing daggers a second round my damage drops to 17 with a +8 attack and there is the problem of the enemy picking up my magic daggers and using them against me.
Using Truestrike with my +2 Heavy Crossbow is getting me 1d10+2d6+7 piercing/radiant+1d6 psychic which is 23, slightly less, but I have a +12 attack roll, I can do it out to 100 feet without disadvantage, and I can do it round after round and if I want even more extra damage I can use a bonus action on hail of thorns and damage multiple enemies.
If I assume an AC of 18, the targets are within 20 feet and consider criticals the damage throwing my magic daggers is 16, using the daggers in melee is 18 (because I attack with the dragontooth twice). Using my crossbow with Truestrike is 18, using truestrike-staff of striking (+13 attack) is 20.
That is just if I want to damage someone, which I don't do all the time.
I can cast another spell as long as I did not use a spell slot to cast a spell with an action or vice versa. I can cast the following spells without a spell slot:
Truestrike (at will)
Friends (at will)
Cause Fear (once a day)
Invisibility (once a day)
Wrathful Smite (once a day)
Summon Fey (once a day)
Fear (twice a day).
Next level I will be able to cast Misty Step 5 times a day without using a slot.
In addition to all these, I can use scrolls to cast a spell.
And that does not even consider all the non-spells I can use.