D&D 5E Ranger Fix

[SeaJay]

Aside from the companion fix to the Ranger, have you implemented any other house rule to make the Ranger more useful?

 

[Zardnaar]

No because th Ranger is a good class and one of the better ones. Note this excludes the Beastmaster Ranger and the good rangers we have seen use a bow. So the Hunter Ranger is good, and we have also used some 3pp ones such as the EN5ider Tempest Ranger which is good. Hunter ranger, sharpshooter, horde breaker and off you go.

Melee ranger have only seen the Tempest one in action but generally dex based melee is a bit weak in 5E and I have not seen a strength based ranger in 5E and I suspect thats is what you have to do to make the melee ranger work or multiclass it. Dex based tempest ranger worked well though. I'm not convinced a melee ranger is any good vs a melee fighter or Paladin.

Otherwise use Polearm Master/GWM or Shield Master and don't bother using hunters quarry.

Note we usually roll 4d6 and Ranger are not generally picked without high dice rolls (a bit better than the default stat array). The good hunter ranger I saw with a bow used the default array. I also consider the Ranger as an advanced class as much like the warlock you can screw it up if you do not know what you are doing.

 

[Ath-kethin]

Haven't needed to. The player in my group who had the Beastmaster PC actually had more time in the spotlight than some of the others, which led to some minor complaining from the players of the warlock and barbarian PCs.

Note that we played it straight out of the book. No 'fix' necessary.

 

[Jester David]

I've considered making hunter's mark and always known, not a spell but just an ability you trigger by using a spell slot. Otherwise it's just a tax, it's so mandatory; you likely only get 3 first level spells and there's so many good choices.
This frees up spells known for other purposes. Keeping it from being a spell also frees up concentration. Hunter's mark is just expected to just always be on, but it's competing with all the other good ranger offensive spells, like hail of thorns or ensnaring strike that are also concentration.

 

[Cyber-Dave]

We used the urban arcana revised ranger...

 

[Yunru]

Beast Master needed the boost, and it got it. Now we just await TWF's much needed boost.
Once that's happened, the Ranger will be a mighty fine class.

 

[Zardnaar]

Beast Master needed the boost, and it got it. Now we just await TWF's much needed boost.
Once that's happened, the Ranger will be a mighty fine class.

Do you have EN5ider? There is a tempest ranger in that built around TWF. Instead of collossus slayer/horde breaker you get an extra attack if multiple attacks hit it so your conditional bonus damage is contingent on that instead of positioning or being wounded already.

Hunters Mark works better on avenger Paladins due to charisma to saves and rangers not being proficient in con saves. People also assume Rangers need to be dex based but in 1E for example they often tanked around in platemail.

Melee Rangers I think I would use heavy armor and not worry about hunters quarry and take the shieldmaster or polearm master feat and use the bonus action for something else.

 

[SeaJay]

Thanks all for the replies

 

[the Jester]

I know I'm in the minority, but I think the ranger is just fine, with the exception (in the PH, fixed in the recent UA revision) of the beastmaster's beast using the ranger's actions instead of having its own.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The biggest change I've consistently implemented is making a ranger prepare spells like a paladin instead of having so few spells known.

I think it makes them more adaptable and more willing to try odd spells if they don't feel they will be locked into keeping them forever.