D&D 5E What is/should be the Ranger's "thing"?

[Eric V]

Someone mentioned the 1E ranger and that sparked a memory. Back in 1E the ranger's biggest edge was tracking. It was an often critical skill, and the ranger was the only one who could do it. With subsequent editions opening abilities to more classes, the classes that had a showcase skill like this have lost some of their raison d'etre. The other big example is the thief, whose climbing skills were critical in 1E, but in later editions have had a declining edge in this department. The 5E ranger is a bit better at tracking than other classes, but not enough to matter much.

I would like some of these unique skills to return, but then you have the issue of what happens when noone wants to play that class. In my games I would expect the players to get creative and come up with alternate approaches, but what about games where the players decide they have to be able to track for some encounters they want to do? One idea would be to allow all classes to have an ability but to impose a higher cost outside of the class for which that's their "thing." Frex, tracking and climb walls require a feat, but the ranger and rogue, respectively, get it for free.

What if Rangers (only) could circumvent pass without trace? And perhaps, at later levels, they are the only ones who can find someone using an Amulet of Proof Against Detection and Location?

 

[Diamondeye]

The Ranger's core ability really should be archery (inc. crossbows). Ranged, nonmagical combat is an area that no other class truly specializes in. You CAN make a fighter do that, but it's not really a fighter "thing".

The different subtypes of ranger can then augment that with either A) spellcasting B) a pet/companion C) stealth and D) melee abilities over and above the default. Then you can have 4 flavors of Ranger, and none of them have to overlap too much with another class. Melee is not EXCLUSIVE to the fighter or stealth to the rogue any more than pets are to conjurors or spellcasting is to <insert spellcasting here>. If the Fighter's fighting is so broad that any Ranger melee ability compromises him or the Rogue's focus on stealth is the same, then the problem is that those classes are defined too broadly.

 

[Minigiant]

What if Rangers (only) could circumvent pass without trace? And perhaps, at later levels, they are the only ones who can find someone using an Amulet of Proof Against Detection and Location?

Hunter's mark for the first. Provided to target them with the spell first.

Beast Sense on an animal friendshiped or conjured bird for the second. You might have to track them by mundane means via Survival checks until you are close to get into range of cast locate object on something on their possession.

You all even magically range, bros?

 

[Herobizkit]

Does having a pet to command make Ask Ketchum a Beastmaster Ranger? Or is that why they bring Brock along... because he can command Pokemon AND has the Lore of the various creatures...?

From the Bulbapedia:

While he is not shown to battle often, [Brock] can understand the situations and strategies in any Pokémon battle, and often explains them to the other characters, probably due to the fact that he was once a Gym Leader. His wisdom is possibly derived from how observant he is; he can tell just by sight how a Pokémon is feeling.

Brock always carries books and maps with him, and thus is usually the character who knows where the group is headed and what they can do when they get there [...] He also carries a lot of other supplies, such as Potions, Pokémon food, and a set of cookware, as well as practical tools like a brush and pocket knife.

 

[DerekSTheRed]

Heck, even within D&D itself... what's Drizzt's favored enemy? Drow, I guess, though his archnemesis is human so maybe not? Minsc's? Canonically, it changes from gnolls to vampires between games! Belkar's? Not a clue... humans, perhaps? For all these guys, it just doesn't come up that often in the story. That tells me something about how important favored enemy is to the ranger class. Can you imagine a wizard character whose ability to cast spells never came up?

Drizzt's favored enemy is goblins. It was mentioned in one of the early books and then Salvatore wrote a short story where Drizzt met a goblin that was nice and it humanized (elfized?) the goblin. That doesn't invalidate your larger point since Salvatore plays D&D and its a bit of the tail wagging the dog.

 

[DerekSTheRed]

If ranger is to be its own class, I would rather like to see a warlord type subclass instead of the hunter subclass. There should be a Hunter background not subclass IMO.

 

[Corpsetaker]

I think the problem is a few people want the ranger to be identified by powers that basically work on everything and work in every terrain.

This is not something I want to see because it's what 4th edition did. I don't want a one size fits all ranger.

 

[Tony Vargas]

This is not something I want to see because it's what 4th edition did.

Under 5e's professed design goal of inclusiveness, "a prior edition did/allowed 'X'" is not a reason to avoid doing X - to the contrary, it's a reason to make sure it's at least possible to do X, at minimum, in some obscure ghetto, somewhere, if not in the standard or basic game.

 

[Yaarel]

A few people want the ranger to be identified by powers that basically work on everything and work in every terrain.

It seems to me, the Ranger needs mastery of at least two terrains.

A military unit might have the urban terrain plus the grassland terrain for protecting rural farming communities in the hinterland.

A viking would have coastal (including seafaring) and depending on region, mountain.

Game of Thrones has Nights Watch with arctic-and-forest.

A Merfolk might have underwater and coastal terrains.

A Drow Ranger might have underdark and urban terrains.

And so on.

The pairing of two terrains helps articulate the flavor of an individual Ranger.

Arctic, Coastal (also Seafaring), Desert, Forest, Grassland, Hill, Mountain, Swamp, Underdark, Underwater, Urban.

To this list, specific settings might add Ethereal terrain, Fire terrain, and so on, depending on the cosmology.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

I don't want a one size fits all ranger.

Why not? Every other class is "one-size-fits-all" by the definition you're using.