D&D 5E Why are non-caster Ranger themes so popular?

[Ancalagon]

Yep. People want a survivalist type character who relies on themselves and their knowledge of the natural world, not magic spells. A few preternatural tricks like being able to discern some weirdly specific details from looking at tracks or putting an ear to the ground is probably acceptable, but most spells are just too overtly magical to fit the concept well. The ranger’s abilities should be uncanny, but not outright supernatural, in my opinion,

this is it...

... that and some people dislike playing spellcasters and want to play a ranger.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Oh, god, please no!

I agree that it is not my ideal solution, but I could see the thematic reasoning behind it.

 

[Ancalagon]

A background only gives you a couple of proficiencies and one mostly-fluff ribbon. Feats eat up a highly limited character building resource. But a class can trade in some of the fighter stuff that a survivalist character really doesn’t need (like heavy armor) for stuff that actually serves the archetype (like natural explorer and primeval awareness).

Outlander is really good to make a pseudo-ranger of almost anyone as long as their ability scores are suitable. Some backgrounds are much more impactful than others, and outlander is one of those.

 

[Charlaquin]

No. My argument is that D&D uses some problematic spells and monster features which require spells to counter efficiently.

I’ve seen no such abilities in D&D 5e. A party with no spellcasters is completely viable.

Since rangers are supposed to fight monsters alone or in small groups, they need spells to do the things they are expected to do unless they have a network of allies, an army, or a patron to back them up.

I disagree. Rangers are no less capable than fighters when it comes to fighting monsters alone or in small groups. Which is to say, perfectly capable.

 

[Minigiant]

I could see that.

Maybe, just like the Bard, Ranger could become a fullcaster with a mix of primal and arcane magic, mostly utility spells made to hunt, track, and counter the mystical beasts of your average D&D settings.

Then bring back the Warden from 4e as the 1/2 caster equivalent of that new ranger.

No need for that.

Just more unique 1st and 2nd level ranger spells.

How you want ranger hunt demon with no Banishment? You want ranger hunt demon, yes? Then give ranger Banishment spells!

 

[Charlaquin]

Outlander is really good to make a pseudo-ranger of almost anyone as long as their ability scores are suitable. Some backgrounds are much more impactful than others, and outlander is one of those.

No it… isn’t? There’s a lot more to being a ranger than having a high bonus to nature and survival checks.

 

[Charlaquin]

How you want ranger hunt demon with no Banishment?

With… weapons? Maybe magical or silvered weapons to overcome the damage resistance. No big deal.

 

[Minigiant]

I’ve seen no such abilities in D&D 5e. A party with no spellcasters is completely viable.

yes for certain things.

once stuff start turning invisible, flying, swimming in the earth, and casting broken stuff like pass without trace and wall of force, a party of fighters and barbarians starts looking helpless unless the DM aids them.

This precisely why 4e shunted "crazy magic" into its only subsystem that only requires a single feat.

With… weapons? Maybe magical or silvered weapons to overcome the damage resistance. No big deal.

Magical items and silvered weapons. Neither are guaranteed or required in 5e.

 

[Charlaquin]

yes for certain things.

once stuff start turning invisible, flying, swimming in the earth, and casting broken stuff like pass without trace and wall of force, a party of fighters and barbarians starts looking helpless unless the DM aids them.

Bah. These things can be overcome without a spellcaster. You have plenty of tools at your disposal, some magical, some mundane, not to mention your own ability to plan and strategize.

This precisely why 4e shunted "crazy magic" into its only subsystem that only requires a single feat.

You won’t see me arguing that wasn’t a good design decision.

Magical items and silvered weapons. Neither are guaranteed or required in 5e.

They also aren’t required to kill demons, they just make it a bit easier.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

No need for that.

Just more unique 1st and 2nd level ranger spells.

How you want ranger hunt demon with no Banishment? You want ranger hunt demon, yes? Then give ranger Banishment spells!

Oh yes, on that we agree.

The thing that baffles me the most with the ranger's spells list is that they have zero spells to create housing or easy item-carrying, such as tiny hut or secret chest. They are suppose to be all about surviving the wilds; if such spells existed, it would be on any camping aficionado spell list !