I'm starting a thread specifically for this topic because, after reading 6 pages of the general Class Options UA thread, I got to thinking that it would save me time (and that of other people) if we had separate threads for different class option discussions.
First off, I'm not sure how I feel about Primeval Awareness. It certainly increases the # of spells known, which is good thing considering how few the PHB Ranger had. However, I'm not sure how I feel about being able to cast one of each of them per long rest w/out expending spell slots. On the one hand, it's preferable to making a character who feels handicapped by having to choose all the time between thematic-for-character spells vs. help-the-party-all-the-time spells. On the other hand, if this goes through, then the effective # of spell slots that a high level Ranger has is actually a good deal higher than the Paladin.
Secondly, under Deft Explorer, I find it a little strange that Roving gets the Ranger full movement speed with climbing AND swimming regardless of race. This makes no thematic sense and it reduces the utility of various spells and race options. So a Dwarf Ranger who picks up Roving can swim just as fast as a Triton Fighter AND cliimb faster? IMO, a small boost is warranted, but, as written, I think it goes overboard.
Thirdly, I really wish they had added an option that would have given Rangers a concentration boost for the people would really want to play melee Rangers.
The other general Ranger stuff I am mostly fine with, though I still have concerns about the Beastmaster and Hunter sub-classes. I really like the Druidic Magic Fighting Style option and that Hunter's Mark is no longer a spell-slot use spell all the time AND that it can last without taking up concentration. I'm really glad these are being presented in UA and I hope they make it into official material by 2021.
Anyway, please feel free to discuss these and other aspects of the 2019 UA Ranger options here.
Primal Awareness feels like it's trying to do what Rangers have always wanted to do but struggled to figure out, and that is be the party's Master Tracker and Finder of Stuff. Simply getting those spells with no ability to cast them puts pretty severe pressure on the ranger's already sharply limited spell slots. That said...while I very much approve of granting the ranger basic access to these very ranger-y spells that nobody otherwise takes because the ranger's spell selection is so limited, I feel like a case could be made that rangers can get free/slotless casting of their Hunter's Mark or one-free-per cast of their Primal Awareness spells. Not both. If their "class-defining" (literally everyone's words, not mine) Hunter's Mark can be run sans slots and concentration, then they can use the slots that frees up to work their Primal Awareness.
Now admittedly, Hunter's Mark being converted into a class feature rather than a spell is something a lot of people find contentious, but honestly it makes a lot of sense and just makes the class feel better to play. Every ranger player/guide/resource ever assumes you're Marking all the things, all the time (unless you're Laura Bailey), so forcing Mark to consume your spellcasting feels bad. Highly approve of class-featuring Hunter's Mark.
As for Roving? I'm not concerned with racial overlap. Race/class overlap happens all the time; the iconic dwarven warriors of the Clanholds are 'wasting' their racial weapon and armor proficiencies, elven rangers are 'wasting' their racial weapon proficiencies, warlocks with Devil's Sight are usually 'wasting' their race's innate darkvision, so on and so forth. A dwarf ranger with Roving swims as fast as a triton fighter, yes. So does a water genasi regardless of class. So do sea elves. Yeah, those are 'watery' races, but the ranger is using a class feature to gain that ability. Same as other character using class features to gain race-y abilities, like gaining darkvision through shadow sorcery or twilight clericdom.
Roving is specifically the 'wilderness doesn't slow me down' ability, the feature of the ranger class that allows them to move freely and with ease through demanding terrain. Exactly as one would expect of a ranger. Telling the ranger that a simple rock wall is going to stop them, or that they can't ford a river any better than the party's citified magical dandyman wizard, is going to piss that ranger off a lot more than telling the triton "this person who's trained and lived in the wilderness for their entire lives can swim as well as you can."
Heh, and besides. Anyone who plays a Volo's Guide to DM Headaches race deserves what they fleepin' get.
Roving is one of my favorite features of the Class Options ranger. It really makes you feel like a badass wilderness survivalist without actually unbalancing anything. Yes, it overlaps with some very uncommon races... but, so? Now your triton fighter and human ranger can go scout the underground river together. You can't expect every ability to be completely unique. It's like you're a Navy SEAL or Army Ranger. This is EXACTLY what I want from a ranger in D&D.
Roving would both make more thematic sense and be more balanced if you got to choose either Climbing or Swimming for the full movement bump. Then give the character the option of taking it again for another 5' increase and the ability to get the other one. I don't see why a class feature should automatically trump a racial feature. Yes, training makes a difference, but that doesn't mean that inherented traits should be now become just another superfluous part of character creation. There should be long lasting effects to choosing your race.
So, I've been thinking a lot about the balance of the Ranger Class Variants, and came up with the following criticisms:
Favored Foe is unbalanced for multiclassing. It's way too strong a feature for level 1, especially paired with Deft Explorer.
Primal Awareness is a bit too strong, granting resource-less uses of those spells, some of which tread on the druid or arcanist role a little too much in my opinion, and may not thematically fit for every Ranger.
I don't like that Rangers lose their favored terrain features. I feel like it's pretty thematic to the core of the Ranger's identity that they're masters of the terrain they live in.
So, in the interest of fine-tuning the class for eventual publication, I offer the following adjustments for the first three levels in the Ranger class:
Keep Natural Explorer as-is at level 1. This is a relatively weak ribbon feature that gives the Ranger an identity as a survivalist in their element.
Grant Deft Explorer at level 1. This feature is a strong addition to the Ranger, and it seems on-par with the strength of features other classes get at level 1, especially with the other level 1 feature being a ribbon.
Move Favored Foe to level 2. This prevents 1-level dipping for free, no-concentration Hunter's Mark, and it comes on-line at the same time as a lot of other classes getting their more powerful signature abilities like Divine Smite or Action Surge.
Keep the Fighting Style feature at level 2, and optionally add Druidic Warrior as an option.
Keep Spellcasting at level 2, and optionally expand it with the Ranger Spells and other spellcasting enhancements from the UA document.
Remove Primeval Awareness entirely, and don't replace it with Primal Awareness. Instead, add Beastmaster Magic and Hunter Magic features to the Beastmaster and Hunter subclasses, to bring them in line with the other subclasses that get bonus spells that fit the subclass thematically. Beastmaster can get spells like Speak with Animals and Beast Sense, tying in thematically with their connection to the primal, while the Hunter would get spells like Detect Magic and Locate Creature, spells that help them track down their targets. Model these after the similar features in the other subclasses where it adds the spells to their list of known spells (without counting against their number of spells known), but don't give them free uses of them like Primal Awareness would have.
I also, personally, would keep Fade Away at level 10 from the UA document in place of the PHB Hide in Plain Sight, since it's both simpler mechanically, and actually useful.
I'm not going to touch the Beastmaster part of the UA for now, since I am already working on a replacement Beastmaster subclass that I will be sharing for feedback later.
There absolutely should be long-lasting effects to choosing your race.
Currently, though? There are not.
5e went the way of many modern games and made species selection largely cosmetic, outside the stat bonuses they provide. Most species features are bland and of minimal utility, with very few exceptions, and furthermore they're not well differentiated. The mass profusion of completely identical Darkvision, for instance, makes Darkvision less of an extra special species quirk and just a penalty for the tiny handful of species that don't have it.
It means that if people are willing to eat the stat penalties for not optimizing their build, which is admittedly hard to do in point buy/standard array because those numbers are hot moose piss, then they can freely play any species/class combination that floats their boat and not feel bad. It also means species is a largely superfluous choice in the game that has absolutely no bearing on the character unless a DM goes well out of their way to MAKE it matter. Whether that's good or bad, whether it's the right way to go or not, or whether it's even possible for a for-profit business to go any other way given how supercharged the subject of 'race' is in political arenas these days? Questions for a different thread.
As it stands? Roving feels like an interesting trick. As Nate said, it's a very special-forces sort of thing, and rangers have long needed to feel less like plant pansies and more like badass nature commandos. A triton wizard maybe shouldn't be any better in the water than a human ranger who's not only trained his body his whole life, but also ensured that training was brutal, rigorous, and effective. Sure, the tritons and the genasi can breathe underwater and thus outperform the non-aquatic ranger over any given length of time longer than one fight, but in burst movement common to surface scuffles around rivers and the like? Why not allow the ranger to move like they know what they're doing?
Saying "you can expend an ENTIRE CLASS FEATURE to gain five feet of movement speed and also maybe one choice of alternative movement method, if you roll well" seems dodgy, ne?
The ranger is a core class that every agrees needs a bump. This is an extremely flavorful bump that in NO WAY unbalances the class, but still feels like an awesome ability (given by the fact that someone already feels like they need to nerf it). I think it's perfect. A ton of racial features get overlapped by class features. At least a couple classes grant darkvision. Several races have claws that are totally overshadowed by the monk unarmed attacks. Monks grant AC that overlap the Tortle's AC.
Re: favored terrain .... it's like favored enemy... it makes sense in a story, but in D&D the game, it is extremely swingy. Either you can be flavorful, and take something interesting that may never come up, or you can take the thing you think will come up the most, in which case, you're not really doing it for flavor, you're doing it to min-max.
I think it's much more flavorful and useful in-game to have the ranger be the jack-of-all-terrains... the rogue doesn't have to pick his favored city or dungeons, he's just good at all city/dungeon-type stuff. Same with the ranger.
If you wanted a flavor-adder, give the ranger an option to take a favored terrain and make it like the PHB version..... but don't actually count it as anything other than fluff or a very minor ability.
I think you are forgetting that Race choice does make a difference for many people.
Elf: Several bow proficiencies regardless of Class. No need to sleep. Resistance to charm and immunity to sleep spells.
Halfling: Re-roll 1's. Movement through spaces of larger creatures regardless of ally or foe. Enough said.
Half-Orc: Relentless Endurance. You might not want to have to use it, but you can't tell me this isn't often useful for clutch situations.
So the argument that Race isn't already a major aspect of character creation doesn't really hold water.
Also, just b/c someone can train to be an Olympic level swimmer usually doesn't also make them the best at scaling Mt. Everest. Unless you can give me a good thematic reason for why both Swimming and Climbing should get boosted to full movement speed, the Roving as currently written just sounds like overcompensation for years of neglect to the class.
Re: favored terrain .... it's like favored enemy... it makes sense in a story, but in D&D the game, it is extremely swingy. Either you can be flavorful, and take something interesting that may never come up, or you can take the thing you think will come up the most, in which case, you're not really doing it for flavor, you're doing it to min-max.
I think it's much more flavorful and useful in-game to have the ranger be the jack-of-all-terrains... the rogue doesn't have to pick his favored city or dungeons, he's just good at all city/dungeon-type stuff. Same with the ranger.
If you wanted a flavor-adder, give the ranger an option to take a favored terrain and make it like the PHB version..... but don't actually count it as anything other than fluff or a very minor ability.
I strongly disagree with your interpretation. A forest ranger is not going to be naturally good at navigating the arctic tundra, and a coastal ranger would be out of his element in the desert. It makes sense for rogues that they would be able to recognize advantageous places to put traps, like natural chokepoints, and know the kinds of things to look for (raised stones, subtle seams, bolt-sized holes, tripwires, etc.) regardless of the dungeon locale. I would imagine that if the DM determined it was a trap the Rogue would be wholely unfamiliar with, they'd adjust the DC appropriately.
Also, yes, it can be hit-or-miss depending on the terrain you end up adventuring in, but the same can be said for other features that are just as situational. How often does Thieves' Cant or Druidic come up in most games? Ask Warlocks and Wizards about how often they get to take short rests and get all their stuff back in the middle of dungeons. Heck, the features from backgrounds end up getting ignored most of the time too. The feature doesn't need to be universally applicable to be useful, and in my experience it's a lot more fun to be able to contribute to the group and say "So, if we're traveling through the forest then I can lead us and we won't lose time. I can also forage for food so we don't need to use up rations" vs just stating once at the beginning of the game "Ok, so we don't need rations because I can always forage for us, and we will never get lost while travelling" and that just being the case for the rest of the game.
Also, if you look at my proposed design, it essentially adds Natural Explorer back in on top of all of the UA class variant stuff, so it's a bonus feature anyway and you're not going to lose anything.
Personally I like almost everything that was done with this UA for the ranger, as well as most other classes, and I am sorry I missed the opportunity to partake in the survey.
The Favored Foe feature is quite welcome in my books, however I would have it grow stronger overtime so that you can cast Hunter's Mark ignoring the concentration aspect starting at level 6 akin to choosing a second Favored enemy. At least that would be my solve for the multiclassing issue.
Deft explorer is also quite good I think. I'm very excited to apply it, all of the aspects of it. As for the multiclassing issue here I'd lock them as they are written at levels 1, 6 and 10 akin to the Natural explorer. I agree the ranger should be powerful at home, however what bothers me about Natural explorer is the progression, for instance my ranger was raised in the forests and after a couple of months of adventuring he is suddenly a savant for getting around mountains which he saw recently for the first time, I think the survival expertise is a better way to illustrate that they are adaptable.
I particularly like the expanded spell list with the inclusion of revivify,awaken and greater restoration, as well as the smites finally some of the paladin spells are distributed to other classes instead of them being awarded some of the best ranger spells.
Primal awareness is what really got me. For me the greatest problem of vanilla ranger is the very limited amount of spells compared to the paladin, eldritch knight and arcane trickster. There could be an argument made for not allowing the free casting but overall these are fluffy spells that make rangers feel more ranger-y, for the lack of a better term, and I believe they can't unbalance the game. As for intruding on other classes, this has been done to the ranger so many times (I'm looking at you Scout and Oath of Vengeance) that it should be a non-issue.
I never had an issue with Hide in Plain Sight but Fade Away seems super fun, sure it maybe intrudes on some races but as was mentioned this often happens, the class outweighs the race in gameplay.
I would like to see some explanation for the Foe slayer cap ability if one chooses not to go the route of favored enemies.
Overall, when presented these options really excited me and that's why I hope they'll get published. What I appreciate the most, is that all of these are still options, you can mix and match and it sometimes won't be a black and white decision, as this Natural vs. Deft explorer debate suggests.
P.S. My apologies if I went on some tangents, but since I'm most invested in these changes I chose to voice my opinions here.
I'm very happy with the UA, just a few tweaks I'd suggest...
Deft Explorer - Canny: I think that the skill proficiency & expertise shouldn't be bound together, as that just doesn't make thematic or mechanical sense when taking this feature at 6th or 10th level (I suspect 6th will be the norm because Tireless is off-the-charts at level 1) - either you miss out on the skill proficiency for expertise in an existing skill, else your character spontaneously gains a new proficiency and immediately has it become their strongest skill. I think the easiest approach is to just have player choose a new proficiency from the ranger skill list & then an expertise separately, with the alternative implementation being to ditch the skill proficiency altogether and gain expertise in two ranger skills instead.
Favored Foe: Personally I think it could perhaps stand a slight nerf by swapping out "without requiring concentration" for "while you are concentrating on hunter's mark, your concentration can’t be broken as a result of taking damage" - curtails usage in spell combos & when multi-classing with barbarian.
Fighting Style - Druidic Warrior: I think this is fun and works well using Martial Versatility (allowing it to be swapped out at level 5 when obtaining Extra Attack), but when not using the Martial Versatility rule it seems like a trap option unless consciously giving up a significant combat buff for utility cantrips. I don't really have a good suggestion for a change though short of giving all rangers a cantrip!
Ranger Companion Options: The Beast of the Earth just seems like the inferior option - it is slightly worse pretty much across the board, with the only edge being a single extra hit point. I'd happily see it either play into a flanking buddy role - e.g. natural armor & more hit points - or give it some meaty sensory bonuses to act as a tracker. Unrelated; maybe an aquatic Beast of the Water option too, just because beast masters from aquatic races are already problematic - the flavor for primal beasts suits such a concept perfectly.
The solution I thought of for keeping Favored Foe from being too powerful early on was to give two regular uses of Hunter's Mark at first level, drop the concentration requirement for them at 6th level, then add the extra three uses at 14th level, using the same progression as Favored Enemy.
As for Foe Slayer, the explanation that was given (on twitter or Sage Advice, I forget which) was that it affects whichever enemy is under the effect of your Hunter's Mark from Favored Foe, which is...still not great, but less useless then before so eh, I'll take it.
Favored Foe: Personally I think it could perhaps stand a slight nerf by swapping out "without requiring concentration" for "while you are concentrating on hunter's mark, your concentration can’t be broken as a result of taking damage" - curtails usage in spell combos & when multi-classing with barbarian.
This doesn't address one of the issues the feature was intended to fix, which is that 2/3 of the Ranger spell list requires concentration, and Hunter's Mark effectively precludes them from using any of them.
It also doesn't actually prevent the sort of moose abuse people are complaining about with Hunter's Mark, which is that classes without any spellcasting altogether can just dip a single Ranger level to get free Hunter's Marks and their choice of Deft Explorer bonus.
The basic gist of the complaints for this UA is that people want the first level of Ranger to suck giant donkey wanger so people have to take at least two levels of ranger for their character to feel like an actual adventurer, because people got badly burned by Hexblades being borked beyond mortal comprehension and hate one-level dips. So they want the first-level class features of the ranger to be as weak or weaker than base PHB Ranger, despite the six years of bitter complaints about how weak the PHB Ranger is, so folks don't do the one-level-of-Fighter or one-level-of-Hexblade thing with it.
The basic gist of the complaints for this UA is that people want the first level of Ranger to suck giant donkey wanger so people have to take at least two levels of ranger for their character to feel like an actual adventurer, because people got badly burned by Hexblades being borked beyond mortal comprehension and hate one-level dips. So they want the first-level class features of the ranger to be as weak or weaker than base PHB Ranger, despite the six years of bitter complaints about how weak the PHB Ranger is, so folks don't do the one-level-of-Fighter or one-level-of-Hexblade thing with it.
Yeah, this is why I moved Favored Foe to level 2 in my proposed changes. Deft Explorer, especially combined with Natural Explorer (rather than replacing it) makes for a decent level 1 feature set imo. Certainly better than the PHB Ranger. Level 2 is a good fit for Favored Foe, as that's when most class-defining powerful abilities come online, such as Divine Smite or Action Surge. It also forces at least a 2-level dip to get that "free" Hunter's Mark, so not something you can really just slap into a build without giving up something somewhere else.
Can't do that though, Sang. It's "Alternative Class Features"; the 'alternative' feature has to come online at the same level as the feature it's replacing or everything ends up screwed up.
Think of it this way - does moving Favored Foe to 2nd level really, truly devalue it the way you think it does? Second-level ranger gets access to basic ranger spellcasting, the ranger's Fighting Styles, and in your version it also gains them concentration-free Hunter's Mark as well as the Natural Explorer bonuses you've reintroduced. Two levels of Ranger is just as overloaded as two levels of Ranger would be before - more so, since you've doubled up on terrain-based bonuses.
You cannot move class features to new levels when proposing alternative features. So either it's okay for first-level Ranger to not be utterly putrid and a waste of a level, or it's not.
Can't do that though, Sang. It's "Alternative Class Features"; the 'alternative' feature has to come online at the same level as the feature it's replacing or everything ends up screwed up.
Think of it this way - does moving Favored Foe to 2nd level really, truly devalue it the way you think it does? Second-level ranger gets access to basic ranger spellcasting, the ranger's Fighting Styles, and in your version it also gains them concentration-free Hunter's Mark as well as the Natural Explorer bonuses you've reintroduced. Two levels of Ranger is just as overloaded as two levels of Ranger would be before - more so, since you've doubled up on terrain-based bonuses.
You cannot move class features to new levels when proposing alternative features. So either it's okay for first-level Ranger to not be utterly putrid and a waste of a level, or it's not.
Considering the entire point of the UA approach is to give feedback on design, I don't see any reason why shifting features around is unacceptable, especially when that change brings the class more in line with how other classes are designed. Compare my proposed design to the Paladin, for example.
Level 1 Paladin: Divine Sense (ribbon) and Lay on Hands (utility)
Level 1 Ranger: Natural Explorer (ribbon) and Deft Explorer (utility)
Level 3 Paladin: Divine Health (utility), Sacred Oath (including Oath Spells and Channel Divinity)
Level 3 Ranger: Ranger Archetype
If anything, the Base Ranger is STILL underpowered by comparison because they don't get another feature at level 3 if they go Beastmaster or Hunter, which grant 1 feature each at level 3. This is balanced by the other Ranger Archetypes having two features at level 3, plus expanded spells, which just highlights the need for Beastmaster and Hunter to be buffed to at least have expanded spells, though honestly another level 3 feature for each to bring them in line with the other Ranger Archetypes would be great too. If Beastmaster and Hunter were buffed in this way, then Rangers and Paladins would be pretty much at parity for levels 1-3.
If keeping things as close to the original design is as necessary as you say, even though we're talking about overhauling pretty much the whole class anyway, then make Favored Foe replace Primeval Awareness at level 3 and make Deft Explorer replace Favored Enemy instead of Natural Explorer at level 1. This still leaves us comparatively feature-weak at level 2 and seriously overloads level 3 with multiple subclass features, bonus subclass spells, plus Favored Foe, but at least it passes the arbitrary "requirement" of not moving features around.
The intent behind the UA is to test the waters for drop-in replacements for existing class features. Not class redesigns, no matter what people say about the Ranger options. I imagine any such book release would be forced to stick to one-to-one replacements or enhancements simply to avoid breaking the PHB classes with dead levels, or overloaded levels. A full-up redesign of the PHB ranger isn't in the cards for a 'Class Feature Alternatives' book.
Admittedly, a pen-and-paper sheet can be whatever the figgety Newton you want it to be, and any DM can say "yeah no lol" to the dread one-level ranger dip if they like. But us digital-tool folks are stuck with what the books say, and I'd caution against expecting class features to get moved around.
I couldn't have said it better myself. Favored Foe is overtuned, but that's not unusual for a UA, and the intent here is to provide a workable alternative to the (I'mma be blunt: utterly shitty) Favored Enemy feature, and likewise for Deft Explorer and the (equally shitty) Natural Explorer (Deft Explorer, by the by, does provide a purely ribbon option, which as DM you could say is automatically at 1st level while the other 2 are available only at higher level).
And yeah, as DM you can change things around however you want in your campaign, but this UA does not account for switching class features around, only for providing alternatives and a couple additions to certain features for those who feel that certain existing features are lackluster.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm starting a thread specifically for this topic because, after reading 6 pages of the general Class Options UA thread, I got to thinking that it would save me time (and that of other people) if we had separate threads for different class option discussions.
First off, I'm not sure how I feel about Primeval Awareness. It certainly increases the # of spells known, which is good thing considering how few the PHB Ranger had. However, I'm not sure how I feel about being able to cast one of each of them per long rest w/out expending spell slots. On the one hand, it's preferable to making a character who feels handicapped by having to choose all the time between thematic-for-character spells vs. help-the-party-all-the-time spells. On the other hand, if this goes through, then the effective # of spell slots that a high level Ranger has is actually a good deal higher than the Paladin.
Secondly, under Deft Explorer, I find it a little strange that Roving gets the Ranger full movement speed with climbing AND swimming regardless of race. This makes no thematic sense and it reduces the utility of various spells and race options. So a Dwarf Ranger who picks up Roving can swim just as fast as a Triton Fighter AND cliimb faster? IMO, a small boost is warranted, but, as written, I think it goes overboard.
Thirdly, I really wish they had added an option that would have given Rangers a concentration boost for the people would really want to play melee Rangers.
The other general Ranger stuff I am mostly fine with, though I still have concerns about the Beastmaster and Hunter sub-classes. I really like the Druidic Magic Fighting Style option and that Hunter's Mark is no longer a spell-slot use spell all the time AND that it can last without taking up concentration. I'm really glad these are being presented in UA and I hope they make it into official material by 2021.
Anyway, please feel free to discuss these and other aspects of the 2019 UA Ranger options here.
Primal Awareness feels like it's trying to do what Rangers have always wanted to do but struggled to figure out, and that is be the party's Master Tracker and Finder of Stuff. Simply getting those spells with no ability to cast them puts pretty severe pressure on the ranger's already sharply limited spell slots. That said...while I very much approve of granting the ranger basic access to these very ranger-y spells that nobody otherwise takes because the ranger's spell selection is so limited, I feel like a case could be made that rangers can get free/slotless casting of their Hunter's Mark or one-free-per cast of their Primal Awareness spells. Not both. If their "class-defining" (literally everyone's words, not mine) Hunter's Mark can be run sans slots and concentration, then they can use the slots that frees up to work their Primal Awareness.
Now admittedly, Hunter's Mark being converted into a class feature rather than a spell is something a lot of people find contentious, but honestly it makes a lot of sense and just makes the class feel better to play. Every ranger player/guide/resource ever assumes you're Marking all the things, all the time (unless you're Laura Bailey), so forcing Mark to consume your spellcasting feels bad. Highly approve of class-featuring Hunter's Mark.
As for Roving? I'm not concerned with racial overlap. Race/class overlap happens all the time; the iconic dwarven warriors of the Clanholds are 'wasting' their racial weapon and armor proficiencies, elven rangers are 'wasting' their racial weapon proficiencies, warlocks with Devil's Sight are usually 'wasting' their race's innate darkvision, so on and so forth. A dwarf ranger with Roving swims as fast as a triton fighter, yes. So does a water genasi regardless of class. So do sea elves. Yeah, those are 'watery' races, but the ranger is using a class feature to gain that ability. Same as other character using class features to gain race-y abilities, like gaining darkvision through shadow sorcery or twilight clericdom.
Roving is specifically the 'wilderness doesn't slow me down' ability, the feature of the ranger class that allows them to move freely and with ease through demanding terrain. Exactly as one would expect of a ranger. Telling the ranger that a simple rock wall is going to stop them, or that they can't ford a river any better than the party's citified magical dandyman wizard, is going to piss that ranger off a lot more than telling the triton "this person who's trained and lived in the wilderness for their entire lives can swim as well as you can."
Heh, and besides. Anyone who plays a Volo's Guide to DM Headaches race deserves what they fleepin' get.
Why you shouldn't start ANOTHER thread about DDB not giving away free redeems on your hardcopy book purchases.
Thinking of starting ANOTHER thread asking why Epic Boons haven't been implemented? Read this first to learn why you shouldn't!
Roving is one of my favorite features of the Class Options ranger. It really makes you feel like a badass wilderness survivalist without actually unbalancing anything. Yes, it overlaps with some very uncommon races... but, so? Now your triton fighter and human ranger can go scout the underground river together. You can't expect every ability to be completely unique. It's like you're a Navy SEAL or Army Ranger. This is EXACTLY what I want from a ranger in D&D.
Roving would both make more thematic sense and be more balanced if you got to choose either Climbing or Swimming for the full movement bump. Then give the character the option of taking it again for another 5' increase and the ability to get the other one. I don't see why a class feature should automatically trump a racial feature. Yes, training makes a difference, but that doesn't mean that inherented traits should be now become just another superfluous part of character creation. There should be long lasting effects to choosing your race.
So, I've been thinking a lot about the balance of the Ranger Class Variants, and came up with the following criticisms:
So, in the interest of fine-tuning the class for eventual publication, I offer the following adjustments for the first three levels in the Ranger class:
I also, personally, would keep Fade Away at level 10 from the UA document in place of the PHB Hide in Plain Sight, since it's both simpler mechanically, and actually useful.
I'm not going to touch the Beastmaster part of the UA for now, since I am already working on a replacement Beastmaster subclass that I will be sharing for feedback later.
There absolutely should be long-lasting effects to choosing your race.
Currently, though? There are not.
5e went the way of many modern games and made species selection largely cosmetic, outside the stat bonuses they provide. Most species features are bland and of minimal utility, with very few exceptions, and furthermore they're not well differentiated. The mass profusion of completely identical Darkvision, for instance, makes Darkvision less of an extra special species quirk and just a penalty for the tiny handful of species that don't have it.
It means that if people are willing to eat the stat penalties for not optimizing their build, which is admittedly hard to do in point buy/standard array because those numbers are hot moose piss, then they can freely play any species/class combination that floats their boat and not feel bad. It also means species is a largely superfluous choice in the game that has absolutely no bearing on the character unless a DM goes well out of their way to MAKE it matter. Whether that's good or bad, whether it's the right way to go or not, or whether it's even possible for a for-profit business to go any other way given how supercharged the subject of 'race' is in political arenas these days? Questions for a different thread.
As it stands? Roving feels like an interesting trick. As Nate said, it's a very special-forces sort of thing, and rangers have long needed to feel less like plant pansies and more like badass nature commandos. A triton wizard maybe shouldn't be any better in the water than a human ranger who's not only trained his body his whole life, but also ensured that training was brutal, rigorous, and effective. Sure, the tritons and the genasi can breathe underwater and thus outperform the non-aquatic ranger over any given length of time longer than one fight, but in burst movement common to surface scuffles around rivers and the like? Why not allow the ranger to move like they know what they're doing?
Saying "you can expend an ENTIRE CLASS FEATURE to gain five feet of movement speed and also maybe one choice of alternative movement method, if you roll well" seems dodgy, ne?
Why you shouldn't start ANOTHER thread about DDB not giving away free redeems on your hardcopy book purchases.
Thinking of starting ANOTHER thread asking why Epic Boons haven't been implemented? Read this first to learn why you shouldn't!
The ranger is a core class that every agrees needs a bump. This is an extremely flavorful bump that in NO WAY unbalances the class, but still feels like an awesome ability (given by the fact that someone already feels like they need to nerf it). I think it's perfect. A ton of racial features get overlapped by class features. At least a couple classes grant darkvision. Several races have claws that are totally overshadowed by the monk unarmed attacks. Monks grant AC that overlap the Tortle's AC.
Re: favored terrain .... it's like favored enemy... it makes sense in a story, but in D&D the game, it is extremely swingy. Either you can be flavorful, and take something interesting that may never come up, or you can take the thing you think will come up the most, in which case, you're not really doing it for flavor, you're doing it to min-max.
I think it's much more flavorful and useful in-game to have the ranger be the jack-of-all-terrains... the rogue doesn't have to pick his favored city or dungeons, he's just good at all city/dungeon-type stuff. Same with the ranger.
If you wanted a flavor-adder, give the ranger an option to take a favored terrain and make it like the PHB version..... but don't actually count it as anything other than fluff or a very minor ability.
I think you are forgetting that Race choice does make a difference for many people.
So the argument that Race isn't already a major aspect of character creation doesn't really hold water.
Also, just b/c someone can train to be an Olympic level swimmer usually doesn't also make them the best at scaling Mt. Everest. Unless you can give me a good thematic reason for why both Swimming and Climbing should get boosted to full movement speed, the Roving as currently written just sounds like overcompensation for years of neglect to the class.
I strongly disagree with your interpretation. A forest ranger is not going to be naturally good at navigating the arctic tundra, and a coastal ranger would be out of his element in the desert. It makes sense for rogues that they would be able to recognize advantageous places to put traps, like natural chokepoints, and know the kinds of things to look for (raised stones, subtle seams, bolt-sized holes, tripwires, etc.) regardless of the dungeon locale. I would imagine that if the DM determined it was a trap the Rogue would be wholely unfamiliar with, they'd adjust the DC appropriately.
Also, yes, it can be hit-or-miss depending on the terrain you end up adventuring in, but the same can be said for other features that are just as situational. How often does Thieves' Cant or Druidic come up in most games? Ask Warlocks and Wizards about how often they get to take short rests and get all their stuff back in the middle of dungeons. Heck, the features from backgrounds end up getting ignored most of the time too. The feature doesn't need to be universally applicable to be useful, and in my experience it's a lot more fun to be able to contribute to the group and say "So, if we're traveling through the forest then I can lead us and we won't lose time. I can also forage for food so we don't need to use up rations" vs just stating once at the beginning of the game "Ok, so we don't need rations because I can always forage for us, and we will never get lost while travelling" and that just being the case for the rest of the game.
Also, if you look at my proposed design, it essentially adds Natural Explorer back in on top of all of the UA class variant stuff, so it's a bonus feature anyway and you're not going to lose anything.
Hello,
Personally I like almost everything that was done with this UA for the ranger, as well as most other classes, and I am sorry I missed the opportunity to partake in the survey.
The Favored Foe feature is quite welcome in my books, however I would have it grow stronger overtime so that you can cast Hunter's Mark ignoring the concentration aspect starting at level 6 akin to choosing a second Favored enemy. At least that would be my solve for the multiclassing issue.
Deft explorer is also quite good I think. I'm very excited to apply it, all of the aspects of it. As for the multiclassing issue here I'd lock them as they are written at levels 1, 6 and 10 akin to the Natural explorer. I agree the ranger should be powerful at home, however what bothers me about Natural explorer is the progression, for instance my ranger was raised in the forests and after a couple of months of adventuring he is suddenly a savant for getting around mountains which he saw recently for the first time, I think the survival expertise is a better way to illustrate that they are adaptable.
I particularly like the expanded spell list with the inclusion of revivify, awaken and greater restoration, as well as the smites finally some of the paladin spells are distributed to other classes instead of them being awarded some of the best ranger spells.
Primal awareness is what really got me. For me the greatest problem of vanilla ranger is the very limited amount of spells compared to the paladin, eldritch knight and arcane trickster. There could be an argument made for not allowing the free casting but overall these are fluffy spells that make rangers feel more ranger-y, for the lack of a better term, and I believe they can't unbalance the game. As for intruding on other classes, this has been done to the ranger so many times (I'm looking at you Scout and Oath of Vengeance) that it should be a non-issue.
I never had an issue with Hide in Plain Sight but Fade Away seems super fun, sure it maybe intrudes on some races but as was mentioned this often happens, the class outweighs the race in gameplay.
I would like to see some explanation for the Foe slayer cap ability if one chooses not to go the route of favored enemies.
Overall, when presented these options really excited me and that's why I hope they'll get published. What I appreciate the most, is that all of these are still options, you can mix and match and it sometimes won't be a black and white decision, as this Natural vs. Deft explorer debate suggests.
P.S. My apologies if I went on some tangents, but since I'm most invested in these changes I chose to voice my opinions here.
I'm very happy with the UA, just a few tweaks I'd suggest...
Deft Explorer - Canny: I think that the skill proficiency & expertise shouldn't be bound together, as that just doesn't make thematic or mechanical sense when taking this feature at 6th or 10th level (I suspect 6th will be the norm because Tireless is off-the-charts at level 1) - either you miss out on the skill proficiency for expertise in an existing skill, else your character spontaneously gains a new proficiency and immediately has it become their strongest skill. I think the easiest approach is to just have player choose a new proficiency from the ranger skill list & then an expertise separately, with the alternative implementation being to ditch the skill proficiency altogether and gain expertise in two ranger skills instead.
Favored Foe: Personally I think it could perhaps stand a slight nerf by swapping out "without requiring concentration" for "while you are concentrating on hunter's mark, your concentration can’t be broken as a result of taking damage" - curtails usage in spell combos & when multi-classing with barbarian.
Fighting Style - Druidic Warrior: I think this is fun and works well using Martial Versatility (allowing it to be swapped out at level 5 when obtaining Extra Attack), but when not using the Martial Versatility rule it seems like a trap option unless consciously giving up a significant combat buff for utility cantrips. I don't really have a good suggestion for a change though short of giving all rangers a cantrip!
Ranger Companion Options: The Beast of the Earth just seems like the inferior option - it is slightly worse pretty much across the board, with the only edge being a single extra hit point. I'd happily see it either play into a flanking buddy role - e.g. natural armor & more hit points - or give it some meaty sensory bonuses to act as a tracker. Unrelated; maybe an aquatic Beast of the Water option too, just because beast masters from aquatic races are already problematic - the flavor for primal beasts suits such a concept perfectly.
The solution I thought of for keeping Favored Foe from being too powerful early on was to give two regular uses of Hunter's Mark at first level, drop the concentration requirement for them at 6th level, then add the extra three uses at 14th level, using the same progression as Favored Enemy.
As for Foe Slayer, the explanation that was given (on twitter or Sage Advice, I forget which) was that it affects whichever enemy is under the effect of your Hunter's Mark from Favored Foe, which is...still not great, but less useless then before so eh, I'll take it.
This doesn't address one of the issues the feature was intended to fix, which is that 2/3 of the Ranger spell list requires concentration, and Hunter's Mark effectively precludes them from using any of them.
It also doesn't actually prevent the sort of moose abuse people are complaining about with Hunter's Mark, which is that classes without any spellcasting altogether can just dip a single Ranger level to get free Hunter's Marks and their choice of Deft Explorer bonus.
The basic gist of the complaints for this UA is that people want the first level of Ranger to suck giant donkey wanger so people have to take at least two levels of ranger for their character to feel like an actual adventurer, because people got badly burned by Hexblades being borked beyond mortal comprehension and hate one-level dips. So they want the first-level class features of the ranger to be as weak or weaker than base PHB Ranger, despite the six years of bitter complaints about how weak the PHB Ranger is, so folks don't do the one-level-of-Fighter or one-level-of-Hexblade thing with it.
Why you shouldn't start ANOTHER thread about DDB not giving away free redeems on your hardcopy book purchases.
Thinking of starting ANOTHER thread asking why Epic Boons haven't been implemented? Read this first to learn why you shouldn't!
Yeah, this is why I moved Favored Foe to level 2 in my proposed changes. Deft Explorer, especially combined with Natural Explorer (rather than replacing it) makes for a decent level 1 feature set imo. Certainly better than the PHB Ranger. Level 2 is a good fit for Favored Foe, as that's when most class-defining powerful abilities come online, such as Divine Smite or Action Surge. It also forces at least a 2-level dip to get that "free" Hunter's Mark, so not something you can really just slap into a build without giving up something somewhere else.
Can't do that though, Sang. It's "Alternative Class Features"; the 'alternative' feature has to come online at the same level as the feature it's replacing or everything ends up screwed up.
Think of it this way - does moving Favored Foe to 2nd level really, truly devalue it the way you think it does? Second-level ranger gets access to basic ranger spellcasting, the ranger's Fighting Styles, and in your version it also gains them concentration-free Hunter's Mark as well as the Natural Explorer bonuses you've reintroduced. Two levels of Ranger is just as overloaded as two levels of Ranger would be before - more so, since you've doubled up on terrain-based bonuses.
You cannot move class features to new levels when proposing alternative features. So either it's okay for first-level Ranger to not be utterly putrid and a waste of a level, or it's not.
Why you shouldn't start ANOTHER thread about DDB not giving away free redeems on your hardcopy book purchases.
Thinking of starting ANOTHER thread asking why Epic Boons haven't been implemented? Read this first to learn why you shouldn't!
Considering the entire point of the UA approach is to give feedback on design, I don't see any reason why shifting features around is unacceptable, especially when that change brings the class more in line with how other classes are designed. Compare my proposed design to the Paladin, for example.
If anything, the Base Ranger is STILL underpowered by comparison because they don't get another feature at level 3 if they go Beastmaster or Hunter, which grant 1 feature each at level 3. This is balanced by the other Ranger Archetypes having two features at level 3, plus expanded spells, which just highlights the need for Beastmaster and Hunter to be buffed to at least have expanded spells, though honestly another level 3 feature for each to bring them in line with the other Ranger Archetypes would be great too. If Beastmaster and Hunter were buffed in this way, then Rangers and Paladins would be pretty much at parity for levels 1-3.
If keeping things as close to the original design is as necessary as you say, even though we're talking about overhauling pretty much the whole class anyway, then make Favored Foe replace Primeval Awareness at level 3 and make Deft Explorer replace Favored Enemy instead of Natural Explorer at level 1. This still leaves us comparatively feature-weak at level 2 and seriously overloads level 3 with multiple subclass features, bonus subclass spells, plus Favored Foe, but at least it passes the arbitrary "requirement" of not moving features around.
The intent behind the UA is to test the waters for drop-in replacements for existing class features. Not class redesigns, no matter what people say about the Ranger options. I imagine any such book release would be forced to stick to one-to-one replacements or enhancements simply to avoid breaking the PHB classes with dead levels, or overloaded levels. A full-up redesign of the PHB ranger isn't in the cards for a 'Class Feature Alternatives' book.
Admittedly, a pen-and-paper sheet can be whatever the figgety Newton you want it to be, and any DM can say "yeah no lol" to the dread one-level ranger dip if they like. But us digital-tool folks are stuck with what the books say, and I'd caution against expecting class features to get moved around.
Why you shouldn't start ANOTHER thread about DDB not giving away free redeems on your hardcopy book purchases.
Thinking of starting ANOTHER thread asking why Epic Boons haven't been implemented? Read this first to learn why you shouldn't!
I couldn't have said it better myself. Favored Foe is overtuned, but that's not unusual for a UA, and the intent here is to provide a workable alternative to the (I'mma be blunt: utterly shitty) Favored Enemy feature, and likewise for Deft Explorer and the (equally shitty) Natural Explorer (Deft Explorer, by the by, does provide a purely ribbon option, which as DM you could say is automatically at 1st level while the other 2 are available only at higher level).
And yeah, as DM you can change things around however you want in your campaign, but this UA does not account for switching class features around, only for providing alternatives and a couple additions to certain features for those who feel that certain existing features are lackluster.