D&D 5E No Spell-less Ranger in the Near Future

[MechaTarrasque]

According to https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/09/0...-free-ranger-variant-will-be-further-refined/, it is "unlikely" that the spell-less ranger will be refined further. I would say that means the scout rogue is a pretty good candidate for XGtE.

 

[BookBarbarian]

According to https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/09/0...-free-ranger-variant-will-be-further-refined/, it is "unlikely" that the spell-less ranger will be refined further. I would say that means the scout rogue is a pretty good candidate for XGtE.

I liked the Scout Rogue, but the Scout Fighter was more my flavor of Spell-less Ranger.

I hope we get both but I doubt it, and if we only get one I think the scout rogue is the more likely candidate.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

I liked the Scout Rogue, but the Scout Fighter was more my flavor of Spell-less Ranger.


I hope we get both but I doubt it, and if we only get one I think the scout rogue is the more likely candidate.

That's too bad, because it's a little strange for me that I can't build a spell-less rangers without knowing thieves' cant. (Yes, I know I could build a fighter with the outlander background, but why should all scouts learn thieves' cant as part of their training?)

 

[BookBarbarian]

That's too bad, because it's a little strange for me that I can't build a spell-less rangers without knowing thieves' cant. (Yes, I know I could build a fighter with the outlander background, but why should all scouts learn thieves' cant as part of their training?)

That's a really good point.

 

[Xeviat]

That's too bad, because it's a little strange for me that I can't build a spell-less rangers without knowing thieves' cant. (Yes, I know I could build a fighter with the outlander background, but why should all scouts learn thieves' cant as part of their training?)

I think it's a little strange that all rogues learn thieves cant. Put that in the Thief class and give them a different ribbon at 1st. Or no ribbon; they have enough stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

I think it's a little strange that all rogues learn thieves cant. Put that in the Thief class and give them a different ribbon at 1st. Or no ribbon; they have enough stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But if you play AL . . . there isn't much you can do about it.

Personally, I think thieves cant makes for a great background feature and a terrible class ability. For a thief, assassin, arcane trickster, mastermind, and even swashbuckler, it didn't both me. For a wilderness thief, the can't sticks out like a sore thumb.

 

[schnee]

That's too bad, because it's a little strange for me that I can't build a spell-less rangers without knowing thieves' cant. (Yes, I know I could build a fighter with the outlander background, but why should all scouts learn thieves' cant as part of their training?)

That's definitely a thing in Adventure League, but my DM has been really cool about tweaking things like that.

I'm considering that for my Druid - so he can drop two levels in Rogue to become the ultimate forest survivalist - and he'll give me the choice of changing Thieves' Tools to the Poisoner's Kit (or an Artisan tool proficiency), and Thieves' Cant to Sylvan or Primordial.

Is your table flexible like that?

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

That's definitely a thing in Adventure League, but my DM has been really cool about tweaking things like that.

I'm considering that for my Druid - so he can drop two levels in Rogue to become the ultimate forest survivalist - and he'll give me the choice of changing Thieves' Tools to the Poisoner's Kit (or an Artisan tool proficiency), and Thieves' Cant to Sylvan or Primordial.

Is your table flexible like that?

I would totally do something like if one of my players was interested. It's just a bit annoying that I have to - my house rule list is already two pages long as it is.

 

[schnee]

But if you play AL . . . there isn't much you can do about it.

Personally, I think thieves cant makes for a great background feature and a terrible class ability. For a thief, assassin, arcane trickster, mastermind, and even swashbuckler, it didn't both me. For a wilderness thief, the can't sticks out like a sore thumb.

Yeah, I wish they'd have given the Rogue another language, and Thieves' Cant was one one of the options. I think it makes sense that the class was either extremely well-versed in an urban context, or due to their nature as deceivers and bluffers, had enough social contact and practice to pick up another language.

 

[Pauln6]

Thieves' cant is an optional language. Changing it causes no problem. My PC was raised as a noble before training to be a woodland scout. Thieves cant makes zero sense but Elven makes sense, so she speaks Elven.