D&D 5E Ranger spell selection

[peponf]

There's something I don't really get about Ranger spell selection in 5e. Player's handbook says:

You know two 1st-level spells of your choice from the ranger spell list.The Spells Known column of the Ranger table shows when you learn more ranger spells of your choice. Each of these spells must be of a level for which you have spell slots. For instance, when you reach 5th level in this class, you can learn one new spell of 1st or 2nd level.Additionally, when you gain a level in this class,you can choose one of the ranger spells you know and replace it with another spell from the ranger spell list, which also must be of a level for which you have spell slots.

Does this means that, as a ranger, you must keep the same spell selection during a whole level? Can't you change then after a long rest or something like that? A whole level seems too much time and gives little time for experimenting, right?

 

[DEFCON 1]

Does this means that, as a ranger, you must keep the same spell selection during a whole level? Can't you change then after a long rest or something like that? A whole level seems too much time and gives little time for experimenting, right?

Yes, at each level you Know a number of spells according to the Spells Known column. For the duration of that level, those are the only spells you Know. You then cast them using your spell slots according to the spell slot table.

At your next level-up... if you gain another Spell Known (according to the column), you select a new spell to Know of any spell level you currently can cast. Like it mentioned in the PH... at 5th level when you gain 2nd level spell slots... that new Spell Known can now be of 2nd level (or you could select another 1st level spell if you'd prefer.) And in addition to this... each time you level-up you may swap out one of your current Known spells for a new spell from the Ranger list (of a level you can currently cast). So oftentimes for example, at that 5th level when you now gain 2nd level spell slots, a Ranger might use their new Spell Known to take a 2nd level ranger spell and swap out one of their current 1st level Known spells for another 2nd level spell. So you'd end up with 2 Known 1st level spells and 2 Known 2nd level spells.

If you are a new player and want to "experiment" with different types of spells... you should probably choose one of the main Full caster classes (Cleric, Druid, Wizard) because those classes can prepare spells from their entire spell list or spell book. And those you *can* change after a Long rest.

 

[Li Shenron]

Does this means that, as a ranger, you must keep the same spell selection during a whole level? Can't you change then after a long rest or something like that? A whole level seems too much time and gives little time for experimenting, right?

That part is merely a retraining rule: you can "drop" a known spell learned at a previous level, and replace it with a new one.

It has an immediate benefit of letting the character get rid of a spell she didn't use much, or a spell that she believes has become less useful at higher levels of the game, without really losing anything because she gets a new spell in its place.

It also has an often overlook benefit: the rule doesn't say so upfront, but you can drop a lower-level spell and replace it with a higher-level spell. In other words, the two spells don't need to be the same level.

 

[jgsugden]

At 2nd level, a ranger knows 2 first level spells and has 2 slots to use them. The ranger selects the two spells they know at the time that they gain 2nd level. They can't change them until they gain 3rd level, at which time one of the two spells can be replaced. However, when they gain 3rd level they also gain one spell known and one spell slot. This means they if they knew Longstrider and Hunter's Mark as their first two spells at 2nd level, they could replace Longstrider with Cure Wounds at 3rd level and add another spell like Goodberry. They would then know Hunter's Mark, Cure Wounds and Goodberry until they achieved 4th level.

 

[Gadget]

I've changed Ranger spell casting in my campaign to match Paladin spell casting: Ranger's automatically 'know' all the spells on their list and and are only limited by their slots available. It makes it much more feasible for the player, and I don't see a reason for their spell casting to be hobbled so much when the Paladin, Cleric, & Druid are not.

 

[jaelis]

It makes it much more feasible for the player, and I don't see a reason for their spell casting to be hobbled so much when the Paladin, Cleric, & Druid are not.

Just out of curiousity, would you do the same with ATs and EKs? What about bards and sorcs?

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Just out of curiousity, would you do the same with ATs and EKs? What about bards and sorcs?

Rangers are historically "divine" casters, that know everything on the list. Wizards/sorcerers are limited by spells known. There's no particularly compelling reason why their closest analogue, the Paladin, basically gets more bonus spells always prepared just from their oath than the ranger knows IN TOTAL.

I mean, other than the fact that someone grossly overclocked the paladin class.

I say give them know ranger spells automatically. Then ALSO give them a number of wizard spells known equal to the spells they would have previously got. This would mirror 1st edition rangers knowing a small number of magic user spells. It also makes the ranger more self-sufficient which makes sense as someone often stationed out in the wilds away from allies.

(And then also nerf paladins. But that's another thread.)

 

[Mercule]

Does this means that, as a ranger, you must keep the same spell selection during a whole level? Can't you change then after a long rest or something like that? A whole level seems too much time and gives little time for experimenting, right?

Yup. I'm okay with this -- actually, I prefer it.

Why? I started playing in 1E, when the Ranger had both Druid and Magic User (Wizard) spells. They were clearly not "nature/Druid Paladins". Instead, they were resourceful guys who learned some additional tricks. The Druid spells were really just there because the Magic User spells didn't provide the right tricks. It was a bit wonky to have two, completely separate spell lists, so I was fine with it being merged down to one, in 2E. Making them divine casters always rubbed me wrong, though. On the other hand, I didn't think it made a ton of sense to have them running around with big books, either.

So, fast-forward through a couple other variations of Ranger, to today. We've now got a history of arcane casters that just learn spells instead of preparing/memorizing them. Also, 5E doesn't really make a strong distinction between arcane and divine magic. Really, a given setting could say the Bard represented a "Knowledge Cleric" in the same way a Druid represents a "Nature Cleric" and there would be absolutely no mechanical issues with it, nor any rules fluff (as far as I recall) to contradict it.

So, in my games, I treat the Ranger as a soft-arcane caster (like the Bard) who happens to have some very woodsy-flavored spells. I do not want the Ranger's spells to look like the Paladin's. Working like the Bard is perfect.

 

[peponf]

That's exactly what I wanted to know. Before reading you, I was picturing rangers as spellcasters, but seeing them as warriors with a few tricks under their sleeves makes much more sense. I think I'm keeping the rule of changing spells only as the gain levels, but helping the player to carefully choose them so they don't feel useless for a whole level.

Thanks, everyone!

 

[jgsugden]

Most rangers cast Hunter's mark once or twice per LR for much of their career. That takes their concentration. Accordinly, most of the other spe)s they end up knowing either are used outside combat or are healing spells (or other non-concentration spells). That would be true if they learned spells like paladins, too. I believe the feel of the class would be very similar in both situations.