D&D 5E UA Ranger Actual Play Report

[iserith]

Hmm, did the player mention why they were very happy with the Berserker path? I ask since, I have always been a defender of that path regardless of the 'sub-optimal' or heavy cost associated with it.

The charmed and frightened conditions came up in game in important ways and, due to rage at that time, he was immune to both. It would have been bad if he failed those saves. For everyone.

 

[iserith]

My assumption (which may not be correct) is that the options for the Beast are fairly streamlined so most of the wall clock time spent is adjudicating rolls. With the ranger also not as a spell-heavy I was estimating they, like other weapon classes, probably are on the lighter end of time-per-turn. Putting these together I was _estimating_ that ranger + beast would around the same time per turn as a full caster (who has more options). But I have no play experience yet to see if that is correct.

What is your take?

As someone else points out above, the amount of total "things" that are done between the turns isn't so different between PHB and UA beast rangers, but I think that additional time adjudicating is what makes it seem like spotlight is not equal.

Edit: I also don't seem to have this full caster time issue others are reporting, so I can't offer a very good comparison to them I'm afraid.

 

[iserith]

Great information from an actual play test! But I do have a couple comments.

Regarding the animal companion getting additional spotlight time. The only difference between the Revised Ranger and the PHB Ranger in play time is that the companion has a different initiative and Coordinated Attack. They both need to be moved separately, take damage separately and they both attack separately. The PHB Ranger can attack once and his companion can attack once. The Revised Ranger can attack once and his companion can attack twice (using its reaction). When it comes to spotlight, that's the only difference between the two. So if they went on the same initiative I think it would clear up the majority of the difference, but honestly I would rather the companion kept its own initiative and remove the extra attack.

Yeah, as I read the comments on this particular piece, I think it's that the PHB rangers I generally see aren't using their reaction. The UA beast ranger uses the animal's reaction on the ranger's turn, so that plus the attack from the animal is enough to make it feel like the spotlight time is longer than other characters. Separate initiatives may also be a reason for that perception. And to be fair, it may not even be that the actual time spent is any longer than anyone else... it just feels that way and that's often enough.

The second comment is that the Barbarian would also have advantage on initiative rolls by 8th level, although I would assume that the Rangers had a higher Dex bonus.

That is correct. Both rangers beat the barbarian on Dex.

 

[iserith]

I don't see much of a difference in actions, actually.

Both versions the beast gets to move for free.

Old BM gets 1 bonus action plus up to 3 attacks, plus 2 reactions = 6 things to do.

New BM gets 1 bonus action, 1 attack, 1 beast attack or whirlwind, plus 2 reactions = 5 things to do.

The difference is that the beast's reaction gets used more reliably than it used to and it can whirlwind, but it loses that additional attack at 11. Beast maybe gets a bonus action now, but I don't think that gets used outside of panthers, and any DM that didn't let an old BM panther Pounce was just being a jerk.

The more I think about it and read the comments here, I think it's the beast's more reliable reaction that is the culprit. So when resolving the ranger's turn, it's attack or two with bonus action second weapon attack plus reaction from beast. Then the beast attacks on its turn. So as above I think the spotlight might be affected by that plus the separate turns since you're hearing from the same player twice in one round.

Sorry for the flurry of posts that are probably stating the same thing. I'm responding as I read.

 

[Greybeard_Ray]

First thing: Wonderful news, Is3rith! I'm glad someone has tried out AND reported on the new Ranger options. Sounds like I may have been right about it being roughly equal to the standard choices (for other classes).

Second: Congrats on the fantastic session. It sounds like it was a blast; I'm jealous I wasn't there!

Keep having fun!
Ray

 

[TheCosmicKid]

The charmed and frightened conditions came up in game in important ways and, due to rage at that time, he was immune to both. It would have been bad if he failed those saves. For everyone.

Not for us amused bystanders, surely.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I can contribute a little to this - there's one hunter ranger in our Curse of Strahd game who decided to convert over.

As a DM, I noticed that the new Primeval Awareness is kind of difficult to adjudicate. It's got a pretty huge range, and if there's multiple pools of favored enemies within range, it's kind of hard to give the ranger actionable info. I imagine in campaigns that don't have a complete map, the "is there an X within 5 miles" question will be answered with a "probably yes?". In this, with favored enemies of humanoids and undead (the ranger took an additional "lesser" favored enemy rather than a greater one), I was like, "there's a lot of humanoids in the village over here...and a lot of undead in that spooky castle over there...and probably scattered humanoids and undead in between the two locations, but uhm, I dunno, I haven't rolled for that or anything? And I don't have readily available information on the relative density of creature types in a given region of Barovia?"

I can't imagine not giving a slightly BS-y answer to that question. Is there a dragon within 5 miles? I dunno, man, I haven't rolled for encounters yet!

 

[pukunui]

I can't imagine not giving a slightly BS-y answer to that question. Is there a dragon within 5 miles? I dunno, man, I haven't rolled for encounters yet!

You can cover your butt easily enough in this case. If you say no and then later decide there is a dragon, you can just say it was out hunting beyond the ranger's 5-mile limit at that exact moment ... or else it has protection from divination magic or something.

 

[iserith]

With Primeval Awareness, it might be useful to ask the player why he or she wants to know the information it provides. It may give some insight on either the responses that are best to give in that moment or tip off the DM as to an issue that may need to be resolved (such as player boredom).

 

[I'm A Banana]

You can cover your butt easily enough in this case. If you say no and then later decide there is a dragon, you can just say it was out hunting beyond the ranger's 5-mile limit at that exact moment ... or else it has protection from divination magic or something.

Yeah, but that disappears down the "because I'm the DM, that's why!" tunnel real quick, and that's not fun for me as a DM. I want to give my player useful information, the information he's looking for just doesn't exist, really. I'd appreciate if it worked in a slightly less "Quick, DM, have perfect knowledge of the relative density of every creature type within 5 miles!" fashion, so it could still be useful, but also not force me to know the unknowable.

With Primeval Awareness, it might be useful to ask the player why he or she wants to know the information it provides. It may give some insight on either the responses that are best to give in that moment or tip off the DM as to an issue that may need to be resolved (such as player boredom).

If the ability was maybe worded a bit more like "you can ask the DM a question about your favored prey" or somesuch, that might be a bit better.