D&D 5E It's official, WOTC hates Rangers (Tasha's version of Favored Foe is GARBAGE)

[Mistwell]

Possibly. But at least they seem to be on a stronger design footing these days.

Fine. Then Warlord should also be a Fighter Subclass.

 

[Asisreo]

That's the problem with multiple "pillar" gameplay period. A "pillar" is as strong as how frequent and important it is.

The problem with FE and NEin a Darkest Dungeon like game is that the players can choose how often they trigger and the triggers are from a small set, not that it skips gameplay.

The problem with Natural Explorer is that D&D base gameonly has wilderness exploration as tracking, foraging, navigating, and "cast spell to remove obstacle".

D&D's exploration space is decent enough. The problem is that they have a hard time communicating their ideas in a structured way and DM's are way too lazy to even consider what "exploration" even means, much less take the time to prepare it. When DM's are pressed on time, exploration is the first thing they decide to "wing."

 

[CubicsRube]

I agree that hunters mark should have always been a class feature, not a spell.

It's not trash entirely. The benefit at least is that a ranger can start using spell slots for things other than hunters mark.

 

[Don Durito]

D&D's exploration space is decent enough. The problem is that they have a hard time communicating their ideas in a structured way and DM's are way too lazy to even consider what "exploration" even means, much less take the time to prepare it. When DM's are pressed on time, exploration is the first thing they decide to "wing."

If exploration was defined clearly I think I would know what you're talking about here.

But I don't.

I don't even know what people mean when they specifically connect the Ranger to the exploration pillar. What do these people think the exploration pillar is supposed to be?

I'd always assumed it to be about moving around locations, usually dungeons and seeing what's there. I don't really see how wilderness travel is particularly connected with exploration the may most people play. It's not that common any more to actual explore wilderness - most games just travel through it.

 

[NotAYakk]

Foe Slayer: When you hit a creature with a weapon attack you can choose to mark it as your foe (as your foe, it activates your level 20 Foe Slayer ability as well). This casts the hunter's mark spell with no components on the creature; but, until you are level 2 in this class, you can only apply the damage once per turn. While hunter's mark is on that creature, the spell does not require concentration. You can do this a number of times per day equal to your proficiency bonus.

This doesn't stack with hunter's mark, because it is hunter's mark.

It is weaker than sneak attack at level 1 in practice. You could pick up PAM and use it, but the 2nd tap doesn't kick in until 2nd level.

One issue with it is that it makes DW styles better than archery styles at level 2. We can add a ranged style like so:

Additional combat style (level 2):

When a ranger picks a combat style at level 2, they may also pick:

Rapid Fire Style: When you attack with a weapon as part of your action, you can make an attack with a ranged or thrown weapon as a bonus action. This attack does not add your attribute bonus to damage.

XBE at level 5 is 3d6+12 (22.5) damage (attack+bonus). This with a longbow is 3d8+8 (21.5), or with a heavy crossbow and XBE is 3d10+8 (24.5). So this isn't a power creep.

It does mean a level 2 ranger can be an archer and leverage foe slayer almost as well as a dual-wielding ranger.

DW ranger at level 2 does 4d6+6 with HM (20); rapid-fire longbow is 2d8+2d6+3 with HM (19). Pretty close.

But I guess now the level 2 ranger outdamages the rogue every round, instead of having to play catchup.

 

[Flamestrike]

No, it doesn't.

For one thing, as many people have noted, the feature becomes pretty bad past level 1. At level 1, the Ranger is still dominated by other classes.

A barbarian 2/day gets +2 damage per hit and resist BPS and d12 HD at the cost of a minor action per minute plus a ribbon (unarmored defence)
A ranger 2/day gets +1d4 damage once/round on one foe, plus a ribbon (explorer)
A (duelist) fighter gets heavy armor, +2 damage per hit and second wind.
A paladin gets a heavy armor, 5 HP heal and evil-dar.

The Ranger also has an additional skill over the other three classes. So a minor loss of combat oomph (although they still deal more damage than 1st level Paladins) in exchange for an extra skill proficiency.

 

[Horwath]

Its hasn't been "dumb" for all the editions where people wanted to play a character that specialized in a certain foe or type of foes.

You may argue for/against certain mechanics, but there is a place for the concept.

yes it is. It is 100% an "NPC" ability.
It is based on 100% DM charity.
If DM does not include those monsters, your class resources are spent on nothing.

Same thing is in previous editions with weapon focus/specialization/mastery/whatever feats.
You spent 3/4/5 feats on a single weapon and you always have a priority to hunt for the same kind of weapon and DM has to always keep that in mind.
Fighting styles are far superior design to weapon focus/specialization.

 

[Flamestrike]

I think the new Favoured Foe is great for Rangers who are committed to using their bonus action for other things most rounds (Beastmasters I'm looking at you, but also TWF Rangers).

If you dont want to use it, you can always use Hunters Mark instead.

 

[Horwath]

The Ranger also has an additional skill over the other three classes. So a minor loss of combat oomph (although they still deal more damage than 1st level Paladins) in exchange for an extra skill proficiency.

ranger also has one armor category less because of that skill.
Now we can debate is skill proficiency is better or worse than armor proficiency.
But feats say that armor proficiency is worth 1,5 skills.

 

[Flamestrike]

ranger also has one armor category less because of that skill.
Now we can debate is skill proficiency is better or worse than armor proficiency.
But feats say that armor proficiency is worth 1,5 skills.

At 1st level it doesn't really matter does it?

Scale Mail is AC 16 (presuming Dex 14+), the same AC as Chain mail.