D&D 5E Convince me that the Ranger is a necessary Class.

[CreamCloud0]

Strength and Wisdom are both ability scores. If strength is something that can be objectively measured then so is wisdom. If wisdom is subjective and cannot be objectively measured, then strength can be also.

yes, and 18 STR is still clearly 'better' than 16 STR in the same way that 18 WIS is 'better' than 16 WIS and both are being objectively measured in the same way, but that is not what was being discussed earlier with STR, because there is not a 'Powerful Build' feature for wisdom that says 'this species is wiser than others due to their inherent biological contruction' but in a way that only affects half the things WIS affects.

 

[NotAYakk]

Here is my 'brewed Ranger. It is a woodsy character who has formed a pact with primal spirits.

Level 1 you pick a Primal Bond.

Bond of the Pack: You gain access to a Tasha's Animal Companion. Your Primal spirit forms a creature. It obeys orders on a bonus action; if ordered to attack a target, will continue to do so. If unordered, will defend itself and you by attacking a target that attacks either.

At later levels, your animal damage is increased, and your primal spirit gains extra features from a list.

Bond of the Hunt: Your level is 1 higher for the purpose of Ranger spellcasting. Your Hunter's Quarry deals 1d8 damage.

Your primal spirit hones your senses, and helps you hunt your quarry.

You also gain access to Ranger Cantrips at level 1. These include a fixed True Strike (no concentration, applies to your next attack on the target, line-of-sight range, adds [Tier] damage dice) and Blade Ward (5' radius, increasing by 5' radius per tier), plus utility cantrips (animal friendship without hostility, reaction based guidance, spare the dying, druidcraft, heightened senses, alarm-like spell).

At later levels, Hunter's Quarry no longer requires concentration, spell slots, and its damage increases. You also gain benefits (like knowing where it is).

At level 2, the Skirmisher feature grants both Archery and Two Weapon Fighting styles. You also get the ability to swap out weapons quickly.

At level 5, you gain the ability to cast a Ranger spell and make an attack instead of Extra Attack. The Ranger cantrip "true strike" is a slot-free way to deal damage this way.

---

The idea is that you are a nature-warlock-ish class.

 

[Remathilis]

yes, and 18 STR is still clearly 'better' than 16 STR in the same way that 18 WIS is 'better' than 16 WIS and both are being objectively measured in the same way, but that is not what was being discussed earlier with STR, because there is not a 'Powerful Build' feature for wisdom that says 'this species is wiser than others due to their inherent biological contruction' but in a way that only affects half the things WIS affects.

I feel the issue is that carry capacity is directly tied to strength rather than being influenced by it. The carry capacity should be set by size (small, medium, large) with adjustment made by race (powerful build) and strength rather than strength modified by size and race. That way, a Goliath carries more because he is larger (medium) and powerfully built rather than because he is stronger, which is a truer measure of carry capacity.

That also decouples strength from objective carry capacity, which puts it in line with the other scores being unmeasurable in real life.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Subjective. Got it.

Get rid of it!

It is not subjective. Higher wisdom is objectively more aware than lower wisdom.

But I really don't get what you think the point of ability scores is. If you think they're just arbitrary numbers that do not inform us about the fiction, what purpose do they serve?

 

[Remathilis]

It is not subjective. Higher wisdom is objectively more aware than lower wisdom.

But I really don't get what you think the point of ability scores is. If you think they're just arbitrary numbers that do not inform us about the fiction, what purpose do they serve?

So ability scores are a subjective measure of power. A strength of 14 is stronger than a 16, but it's difficult to measure in any real way since strength combines so many aspects (lifting, carry capacity, athletics, burst strength, etc) that it's impossible to accurately assign any person a strength score objectively. The same is true of all six scores.

I want to dispel this notion that a Goliath is stronger than a halfling because one is bigger and can carry more, that strength has any bearing on size, weight, muscle mass, or the like. A strength 16 halfling isn't the same as a strength 16 Goliath, but for game mechanic purposes (attack, damage, athletics, etc) they have the same capabilities.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I feel the issue is that carry capacity is directly tied to strength rather than being influenced by it. The carry capacity should be set by size (small, medium, large) with adjustment made by race (powerful build) and strength rather than strength modified by size and race. That way, a Goliath carries more because he is larger (medium) and powerfully built rather than because he is stronger, which is a truer measure of carry capacity.

the issue isn't carrying capacity being affected by strength or not, the issue is that powerful build doesn't equally affect all things about strength that it should logically affect, powerful build should act more like a cross between what it does now and having a modified Enlarge spell cast on you permanently: increased carry capacity, a bonus on all STR skill checks and bonus damage with STR weapons

That also decouples strength from objective carry capacity, which puts it in line with the other scores being unmeasurable in real life.

they literally have tests for things like strength, memory, social adeptness, lateral thinking and more, even if they're not defined as DnDs six stats they still exist and are still measurable in real life

 

[Crimson Longinus]

So ability scores are a subjective measure of power. A strength of 14 is stronger than a 16, but it's difficult to measure in any real way since strength combines so many aspects (lifting, carry capacity, athletics, burst strength, etc) that it's impossible to accurately assign any person a strength score objectively. The same is true of all six scores.

That seems more like it is somewhat abstract, but not subjective.

I want to dispel this notion that a Goliath is stronger than a halfling because one is bigger and can carry more, that strength has any bearing on size, weight, muscle mass, or the like. A strength 16 halfling isn't the same as a strength 16 Goliath, but for game mechanic purposes (attack, damage, athletics, etc) they have the same capabilities.

Why? Why they have same capabilities? If the goliath is way bigger and stronger, why they do not also hit harder?

And again, why are we having these scores, if they cannot tell us about the fiction?

You seem to want the rules to be just meaningless undefined mush that do not measure anything. I have no use for such rules.

 

[Remathilis]

the issue isn't carrying capacity being affected by strength or not, the issue is that powerful build doesn't equally affect all things about strength that it should logically affect, powerful build should act more like a cross between what it does now and having a modified Enlarge spell cast on you permanently: increased carry capacity, a bonus on all STR skill checks and bonus damage with STR weapons

they literally have tests for things like strength, memory, social adeptness, lateral thinking and more, even if they're not defined as DnDs six stats they still exist and are still measurable in real life

Tests like this again are subjective against a norm, and while they may show things like decline in cognitive thinking or decrease in motor movement, they can't be like "this test will determine your objective dexterity" . The closest we have to this is an IQ test and that itself is riddled with enough bias as to but useless in all but the broadest strokes of cognitive ability.

 

[Remathilis]

That seems more like it is somewhat abstract, but not subjective.


Why? Why they have same capabilities? If the goliath is way bigger and stronger, why they do not also hit harder?

And again, why are we having these scores, if they cannot tell us about the fiction?

You seem to want the rules to be just meaningless undefined mush that do not measure anything. I have no use for such rules.

Because people get caught up in foolish notions that size equals strength. I used an example of Bruce Lee vs Arnold Schwarzenegger in a fight and Maxperson said objectively Arnold should be able to leverage his strength to match Lee's skill. But that's a deceptive way of seeing it. Lee might not be the musclebound specimen Arnold was, but Bruce was shredded. Absolutely lean muscle mass. Lee might not beat Arnold in a deadlift, but Lee could probably climb a rope faster. I know Lee could break a board and I'm not sure Arnold could. So I ask which is stronger? In D&D, Arnold would be and he'd be better at climbing and breaking things than Lee because he can also lift more.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Because people get caught up in foolish notions that size equals strength. I used an example of Bruce Lee vs Arnold Schwarzenegger in a fight and Maxperson said objectively Arnold should be able to leverage his strength to match Lee's skill. But that's a deceptive way of seeing it. Lee might not be the musclebound specimen Arnold was, but Bruce was shredded. Absolutely lean muscle mass. Lee might not beat Arnold in a deadlift, but Lee could probably climb a rope faster. I know Lee could break a board and I'm not sure Arnold could. So I ask which is stronger? In D&D, Arnold would be and he'd be better at climbing and breaking things than Lee because he can also lift more.

I'm sure Bruce Lee actually was pretty man strong, though Arnold probably was quite a bit stronger. But the things in which Lee would beat Arnold are not measure solely by strength score in D&D. it contributes to them, but there are other factors, such as proficiency bonus, extra attacks, expertise, increased damage die etc. None of this means that strength doesn't measure strength.

Different stats actually measure differtnt things, which is good, as then they can tell us about the fiction. Collapsing all this into confused nondescriptive mush is not a good idea.