Last D&D Survey Results In! Plus What's Up With The Ranger?

As you may know, WotC has a monthly survey/feedback system going. I report on it each month. Last month's survey was about product expectations Gen Con, and the results report was much shorter than usual - just a couple of sentences. "In terms of product, setting books and monster books proved the most popular. We were also happy to see that many of you had played in our published campaign worlds or wanted to try them out. We also saw plenty of support for new character options, with a consensus that most players are happy with our current pace of "slow but steady." I personally feel that my - anecdotal - experience with the online community says the opposite about the current pace, but a survey's a survey!

There's a new survey up, covering the recent Ranger playtest. As WotC mentions, the Ranger is the least popular class, and they intend to approach the class in a number of different ways over the coming year. The Ranger is interesting, because it attracts a lot of snotty comments (not as many as the very concept of a Warlord, but that's another thing).

Click here to take the Ranger survey.

 

[Orlax]

I honestly don't see the current 5E Ranger as that bad. We have one in our party & he does great. Doesn't seem all that out of balance. I do agree that I'd like to see the animal companion be able to do a bit more.

I'm one of the ones who is pretty comfortable with the current release schedule. I don't want a bunch of semi-useful bloat.

I have to agree, the ranger doesn't actually seem that bad, at least with certain builds. I think that is my only main issue with the current ranger is that making it work well requires a little bit of system mastery. Though outside of that they seem to be fairly capable characters.

 

[Corpsetaker]

I honestly don't see the current 5E Ranger as that bad. We have one in our party & he does great. Doesn't seem all that out of balance. I do agree that I'd like to see the animal companion be able to do a bit more.

I'm one of the ones who is pretty comfortable with the current release schedule. I don't want a bunch of semi-useful bloat.

Nobody is asking for bloat, nor does bloat equal a bit more than we are getting now.

Also, if they come out with something you don't like then don't buy it.

Should I not be able to have milk just because you don't?

 

[Orlax]

In all honesty I just think they should do a straight up ranger splat. Not a hardcover or anything. No longer than the 3e sword and fist book, and even that might be a bit too much unless there's a lot of fluffy short story for stuff in it. Give out a few different ranger type classes and options. Working from the whole not a rewrite stand. Though that may be a bit too much crunch to add to the system all at once.

 

[Jester David]

I still don't get the ranger hate. The ranger in my group is awesome.

It's the lowest ranked in terms of popularity.

However... when you rank things in popularity, there's always going to be something at the bottom. Unless it's a five-way tie there'll always be a least popular option.

 

[Louis Brenton]

Nobody is asking for bloat, nor does bloat equal a bit more than we are getting now.

Also, if they come out with something you don't like then don't buy it.

Should I not be able to have milk just because you don't?

Ok, man. Take it easy. All I said is that I'm pretty comfortable with the current release schedule. My personal, very subjective opinion on the subject isn't an attack against you.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

I honestly don't see the current 5E Ranger as that bad. We have one in our party & he does great. Doesn't seem all that out of balance. I do agree that I'd like to see the animal companion be able to do a bit more.

I'm one of the ones who is pretty comfortable with the current release schedule. I don't want a bunch of semi-useful bloat.

I agree with your sentiments. Here have some XP...

 

[thewok]

Personally I am quite happy with the rate of releases.

I am as well. A bit more frequent wouldn't be bad, though. I just wish that every release had more character options to explore.

 

[pukunui]

I said that I thought the PHB ranger was more or less fine as-is. I just want to see the following:

• Natural Explorer made more useful in a general way, rather than something that's only useful in specific terrain types - this makes its usefulness too dependent on the type of campaign being played.
• Favored Enemy replaced with Hunter's Mark as a class feature rather than a spell.
• Primeval Awareness made useful (or removed).

I also said I'd prefer to see the animal companion removed altogether. I really don't see it being necessary to the ranger archetype. Like [MENTION=3586]MerricB[/MENTION], I tend to think of Aragorn more than Drizzt when I think of a ranger.

[MENTION=6748898]ad_hoc[/MENTION]: I'm quite happy with the rate of releases too. In fact, I wouldn't object if they made it even slower! I'm still on Tyranny of Dragons. Who knows when I'll get to Out of the Abyss. Probably not till after the next adventure or two have been released!

 

[JediGamemaster]

I wrote a long winded thing that now I wish had been summed up with "stop messing with classes that are done and make more campaign settings"

 

[Mercule]

I was not kind in my comments about the UA ranger. I liked them thinking outside the box, but parts of the box (broken by 2d6 HD and Ambuscade) are there for a reason.

That's funny. I specifically called out the 2d6 as a fantastic idea (though I did say that Ambuscade might be a bit off).

My biggest realization from the poll was in rating each edition's Ranger. It really called out that I haven't liked a version of the Ranger since 1E. The 5E version is the best one, since, but still not great. I despise the TWF thing, which makes absolutely no sense to be a class feature (this is where the 5E "pick a style" helps). Making the Ranger into a martial Druid is a complete perversion of the archetype (nature's champion isn't bad, it's just got nothing to do with a Ranger). And having a pet is just one build of the Ranger -- one that may make more sense for the Druid to own.

Here's what I want from a Ranger:
- Darn tough to kill. You just won't outlast him. A barbarian may take more punches to the face, but only barely. The ranger will easily outlast him in the wilderness.
- He will turn your surroundings against you. Narratively, this probably includes distracting sounds, laying snares, and taking you down paths that you shouldn't go. Mechanically, use stealth and then something like Ambuscade is spiritually cool.
- Competent at fighting. Not as good as the Fighter, for sure. Probably not even as good as the Paladin, in a straight-up fight. But, he's better than the rouge and will get advantage more often than the other fighter sub-types.
- Uses nature for his own purposes. It's a tool. The best craftsmen take good care of their tools, but that should not be confused with worshiping it.
- Magic is also a tool. It isn't granted by the gods or forest spirits, like a druid. It's specialized, but learned and owned through discipline, like a cross between bard and wizard.

You can add on subtypes, like the homicidal border guard, beast master, or the tireless tracker. The above, though, are stock and apply to all rangers. Okay, I'd cave and let the core ranger be spell-less, with a path for a learned/caster ranger.

As an added bonus, I'll say that I think the barbarian is the better class to view as the martial druid. The barbarian class doesn't really fill an archetype -- unless you're referring to berserker. It's a patchwork of concepts like a berserker and a tribal warrior, along with some "tough guy" stuff (probably because berserkers are scary). I don't hate it, but it doesn't really carry its own weight. Plus, it muddies the waters for some of what the ranger represents (survivalist).