D&D (2024) What type of ranger would your prefer for 2024?

[DEFCON 1]

Whenever I need a spell-less Ranger (which is rare)... I just do what I think it was Rodney Thompson(?) put forth back in 2014/15 to get it... which is strip out the spell slot chart and insert the Battlemaster's Combat Superiority dice and mechanics.

Easy, simple, and balanced.

 

[Reef]

Like bird's flying ability??

That’s actually part of my point. Birds fly because they are birds. Aragorn does near-mystical stuff, not because he’s a ranger, but because he’s not just human…he’s human+. Isildur’s heir, one of the Dúnedain. If I recall, he also has an increased lifespan. Should Rangers get that as well?

 

[Emberashh]

Talking birds and animals into scouting for you? How is that not magic?

In a fantasy world where one of the assumptions is that animals (and trees) are all sapient and can communicate through speech (even of said speech is esoteric and hard to learn for more conventional sapients), then theres nothing "magic" about learning those languages and convincing them to help you out. They aren't being compelled by some mystical force.

This is why in another topic I talked about hard and soft mundaneity. What counts as mundane is what you say is a mundane part of the world in soft mundaneity, which is what most fantasy worlds have. No one in real life can stick their ear to the ground and hear a company of Uruks running around miles away. But theres nothing in LOTR that says thats not a learnable skill if someone applied themselves, and Aragorn doesn't need to wave a wand and say some funny words to do it.

Hard mundaneity would be a strict adherence to the real world in all aspects, which is not what most fantasy worlds do, and those that too almost always make the fantastical parts of them an entirely separate universe from where all the proverbial Muggles live.

 

[Emberashh]

That’s actually part of my point. Birds fly because they are birds. Aragorn does near-mystical stuff, not because he’s a ranger, but because he’s not just human…he’s human+. Isildur’s heir, one of the Dúnedain. If I recall, he also has an increased lifespan. Should Rangers get that as well?

The same argument works against the idea that Rangers should have magic, fyi.

 

[Scott Christian]

In my opinion, a ranger is one of those rare classes where it is nearly impossible to summarize their skill set within the rules. Part of it is knowing the area and terrain and flora and fauna. This part alone only works if the DM is knowledgeable of such things, or the player is able to describe with uncanny accuracy such things. For most people, this is difficult.

The second part of what makes a ranger difficult is how D&D handles terrain and exploration of wild areas. Don't get me wrong, for a game like D&D, I like how they glossed over it all and just said, exhaustion. But anyone who has ever hiked in remote locations understands the difficulty terrain presents; the ability to find and use natural resources, and the abuse one's body takes while climbing, hiking, and exploring. I mean, don't even get me started on spelunking!

So, these two parts, which is often the pictured ranger for some players, instantly makes it not feasible as a class. I mean, you can place it in, but it will always be lackluster because the knowledge presented in adventures and the ruleset for exploration is too limited for the scope of this style of ranger.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm tired of everyone wanting to Do A Thing needing a spell to do it.

Shoot a bunch of arrows? Be able to effectively cover your tracks? Understand the emotional body language of an animal? Track a target in battle?

No normal person could possibly do that! MUST BE MAGIC!

Spellless Rogue, Spellless Fighter, Spellless Ranger, Spellless Barbarian, and as a Two For Flinching, Spellless Wizard.

 

[TwoSix]

We already have a half-caster ranger, so I'd like to see a spell-free ranger to complete the set.

 

[Emberashh]

I'm tired of everyone wanting to Do A Thing needing a spell to do it.

Shoot a bunch of arrows? Be able to effectively cover your tracks? Understand the emotional body language of an animal? Track a target in battle?

No normal person could possibly do that! MUST BE MAGIC!

Spellless Rogue, Spellless Fighter, Spellless Ranger, Spellless Barbarian, and as a Two For Flinching, Spellless Wizard.

It makes sense when you stop thinking "Spells" and start thinking "Powers" and realize 5e is just a mangled version of 4e where nearly all means of interacting with the game got renamed into a class and fiction specific nomenclature.

 

[Vaalingrade]

It makes sense when you stop thinking "Spells" and start thinking "Powers" and realize 5e is just a mangled version of 4e where nearly all means of interacting with the game got renamed into a class and fiction specific nomenclature.

And that class was 'Wizard' and that fiction was 'Hahahaha, Nope."

 

[ChameleonX]

I'm tired of everyone wanting to Do A Thing needing a spell to do it.

Shoot a bunch of arrows? Be able to effectively cover your tracks? Understand the emotional body language of an animal? Track a target in battle?

No normal person could possibly do that! MUST BE MAGIC!

Spellless Rogue, Spellless Fighter, Spellless Ranger, Spellless Barbarian, and as a Two For Flinching, Spellless Wizard.

A spelless wizard would just be a book nerd...