D&D General What is a Ranger? A miserable pile of secrets! (+)

[Weiley31]

@Gradine

But enough talk....................HAVE AT YOU!!!!

 

[Minigiant]

Not that dual wielding is really a ranger trope. It just sort of happened one day, and we've been stuck with it ever since.

It's not that dual wieling is wrong.

Rangers should have good dexterity. But their are more that 2 dextrous fighting styles

• Archery
• Throwing
• Dual Wielding
• One handed finesse
• Two handed finesse
• Martial arts/Claws

It just is never supported early in any edition. Just Archery. Or Archery and Dual Wielding.

 

[Oofta]

It's tough to define a ranger because it doesn't really represent any non-D&D archetype. Even Aragorn is only special because of his heritage. So anything we come up with is going to be on shaky ground.

But I would emphasize a ranger being a wilderness warrior that has supernatural capabilities and spells. I also see them being lightly armored, stealthy in natural surroundings, maybe with advantage on stealth if in a natural environment?

Weapons I don't think matter, I don't think they need to explicitly be dex based. I could even see options to lean into being close to a barbarian type as an option. Animal companions should also be an option, but get rid of the requirement to command them every round. You should be able just tell your companion who to attack.

 

[CreamCloud0]

If building what I think the next version of the ranger should be i think it should be a high-skill class, a non-magic druid(nature+healing) with good dose of rogue(stealth+exploration) and a bunch of fighter-manoeuvre/monk-ki esc bow and arrow based abilities(think marvel’s hawkeye or breath of the wild link’s trick and magic arrows, with hunter’s mark as a class ability rather than a spell.

 

[Shardstone]

If building what I think the next version of the ranger should be i think it should be a high-skill class, the non-magic druid(nature+healing) with good dose of rogue(stealth+exploration) and a bunch of fighter-manoeuvre/monk-ki esc bow and arrow based abilities(think marvel’s hawkeye or breath of the wild link’s trick and magic arrows, with hunter’s mark as a class ability rather than a spell.

Sounds like a great Fighter Martial Archetype!

 

[Charlaquin]

The alternative, the pure-martial ranger, just strikes me as uninteresting. There isn't enough there beyond "beast tamer" to make the Ranger interesting enough to not be a bararian, fighter, or worse yet, a series of mediocre feats you'll never get to pick. And on top of that, I don't really want to have to be a beast tamer. Its a lot to keep up with and kind of anxiety-inducing wondering when my crappy CR 1/4th panther is gonna be one-shot post 4th-level (spoiler: every combat lol).

A magical Ranger not only has a lot more juice to draw on, it actually deserves to be a seperate class. Like really, what is a pure martial ranger if literally not just a fighter? There isn't a significant difference. I don't even think there is a difference at all

...But give that dog some spellcasting? WHEW BOY! Now my ranger is also the witch of the wilds and there's a reason to be seperate.

If being just a fighter was a reason to disqualify something from class status, there would be no non-magical classes other than fighter.

 

[Azzy]

For me, it's bows, a bit of (possibly supernatural) nature affinity & ability/druidry magic, and stealth. They need to be excellent hunters, survivalists, and explorers.

Being that magic has been part of the class since the beginning, I feel spells should be a part of the class. And while it should have advantages towards the exploration pillar, care should be taken not to make it so that it obviates that pillar. Right now, the base ranger is a bit boring in its abilities (I say this as a ranger player who has been underwhelmed as I leveled up on more than one occasion), and some of those abilities eat into the design space that should go to making the subclasses more hefty and meaningful.

Favored Foe can go from the base class (the Hunter and Monster Slayer archetypes really do the concept better) for all I care, that should free up some space for reinforcing the base concept. Pets should definitely be a subclass and should design to be a companion rather than a disposable resource.

 

[Scribe]

Why? Pets, bows and nature.

That's it, right there.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Sounds like a great Fighter Martial Archetype!

But I don’t want it to be a fighter subclass, i want it to be the ranger

 

[Azzy]

Not that dual wielding is really a ranger trope. It just sort of happened one day, and we've been stuck with it ever since.

I don't mind it as an option (like it is now), but it is a bit perplexing.