D&D (2024) 2024 Player's Handbook reveal: "New Ranger"

"More than any other class, the ranger is a new class."

​

It has been a year (less a day) since we last saw the Ranger in UA Playtest 6. There still could be a lot of change. My sense is that they are more or less happy with three of the subclasses (Fey Wanderer, Beastmaster, and Gloom Stalker), but many questions remain: Will anyone be happy with the favored enemy/relation to the land abilities? Will Hunter's Mark be foregrounded in multiple abilities? Will rangers at least get a free casting of the Barrage/Volley spells? For the Hunter, will the "Superior" abilties at levels 11 and 15 continue to be things you didn't choose at lower levels? For the Gloom Stalker, will they pull out 3rd level invisibility from "Umbral Sight"? Any chance for a surprise substitution of the Horizon Walker? Let's find out.

OVERVIEW

• "widely played, but ... one of the lowest rated"
• Spellcasting and Weapon Mastery at 1 (as with Paladin). Spellcasting can change spells after long rest (not every level)
• NEW: Favored Enemy: Hunters Mark always prepared, and X castings per day. (was level 2 in PT6, where it was WIS times/day)
• NEW: Fighting Style at 2 (no limits on choice). or you may choose two cantrips (again, like Paladin).
• NEW: Deft Explorer at 3: expertise in a proficient skill, +2 languages. NO INTERACTION WITH LAND TYPES. This is a nerf from PT6, where at least you got a bonus to Intelligence (Nature) checks.
• Extra attack at 5, Roving at 6 (+10' move, Climb Speed, Swim speed).
• Two more expertise options, at 9, presumably. Compared to the playtest, this is a nerf: PT6 gave 1 expertise, the spell Conjure Barrage always prepared, and +2 land types for Explorer. These had problems, but it's a lot to lose for one additional expertise.
• At 10, Tireless (as in PT6) -- THP and reduced Exhaustion.
• NEW: At 13, Damage no longer breaks concentration with Hunter's Mark.
• At 14, Nature's Veil -- invisibility. At 18, Blindsight.
• NEW: At 17, advantage vs person marked with Hunter's Mark.
• NEW: Damage of Hunter's mark increases to d10, not d6. (This too is a nerf from the playtest, which gave +WIS to hit, and +WIS to damage.)

The clear expectation is you are using Hunter's Mark, occupying your concentration and taking your first Bonus action every combat, from levels 1-20.

SUBCLASSES
Beastmaster

• command Primal Beast as a bonus action, and higher level abilities as in PT6, apparently.
• stat blocks level up with you (as in Tasha's and PT6). Beast gets Hunter's Mark benefits at 11.

Fey Wanderer

• vague on specifics; apparently just as in Tasha's.

Gloom Stalker

• as in PT6, Psychic damage bonus a limited number of times per day. +WIS to initiative (cf. Assassin and Barbarian)
• Umbral Sight, darkvision bonus, and invisible in the dark.
• NEW: psychic damage goes up at level 11. Mass fear option of Sudden Strike mentioned, nothing about Sudden Strike.

Hunter.

• Hunter's Lore at 3: know if there are immunities/resistances of creature marked by Hunter's Mark.
• NEW: Hunter's Prey at 3: you have a choice and can change your choice every short/long rest.
• NEW: Defensive Tactics at 7: you have a choice, and again can choose after a rest. The choices are Escape the Horde, Multiattack defense (not Evasion, Uncanny Dodge, and Hunter's Leap, as in PT6).
• NEW: At 11, Hunter's mark now "splashes" damage onto another target.
• NEW: you can choose to take resistance to damage, until the end of your turn.

 

[g00se99994]

People keep harping on Hunter's Mark: the class but you know what I see?

I see a class with martial weapons, medium armor and shields, expertise in three skills, two attacks, d10 HD weapon mastery, and half-caster druidic magic with the option to get cantrips or a fighting style if wanted.

If WotC had called this jack of all trades "the bard" you'd all be going gaga over it! And that's even before ignoring its speed boost, free invisibility, etc.

If you look at the ranger as Jack of all trades class, it's pretty amazing. It's centrally got as much going for it as the rogue and is maybe a step behind the barbarian. (I await the monk and bard previews to determine how they fall, considering the bard was never shown in it's close to final form and the 2nd monk was a touch overtuned). I think there are things that still could have been done a bit better (that capstone is uninspired) but I have come around that it's not as going to be bad a class in play once your character is able to fight, sneak, blast and heal with others as the 2nd best in each.

I think you make some fair points about what you like. The "If WotC had called this jack of all trades "the bard" you'd all be going gaga over it!" sounds like fan blaming and its so tiring. That strategy is unconvincing and won't convince anyone to your point of view. If your just venting then ignore my post LOL.

 

[Arilyn]

I can think of one version of 5e that has a well-designed fighter class and a spell-less ranger...

I think the ranger is my favourite class in Level Up. I love spell-less rangers. If monks, rogues and barbarians can do lots of cool things without spells, rangers should too. Too many classes running around with spells make wizards seem like the least adept, since they are stuck with spellbooks.

 

[g00se99994]

I think the ranger is my favourite class in Level Up. I love spell-less rangers. If monks, rogues and barbarians can do lots of cool things without spells, rangers should too. Too many classes running around with spells make wizards seem like the least adept, since they are stuck with spellbooks.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[Minigiant]

People keep harping on Hunter's Mark: the class but you know what I see?

I see a class with martial weapons, medium armor and shields, expertise in three skills, two attacks, d10 HD weapon mastery, and half-caster druidic magic with the option to get cantrips or a fighting style if wanted.

If WotC had called this jack of all trades "the bard" you'd all be going gaga over it! And that's even before ignoring its speed boost, free invisibility, etc.

If you look at the ranger as Jack of all trades class, it's pretty amazing. It's centrally got as much going for it as the rogue and is maybe a step behind the barbarian. (I await the monk and bard previews to determine how they fall, considering the bard was never shown in it's close to final form and the 2nd monk was a touch overtuned). I think there are things that still could have been done a bit better (that capstone is uninspired) but I have come around that it's not as going to be bad a class in play once your character is able to fight, sneak, blast and heal with others as the 2nd best in each.

I think that is the problem.

The 2024 ranger looks like a good class.

It's just bland and barely flavored like a ranger because WOTC only knows how to season with spells but won't create new ranger spells.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think you make some fair points about what you like. The "If WotC had called this jack of all trades "the bard" you'd all be going gaga over it!" sounds like fan blaming and its so tiring. That strategy is unconvincing and won't convince anyone to your point of view. If your just venting then ignore my post LOL.

I was convinced. I am really not seeing how this is fan blaming.

If you mean saying that there are people who are overreacting and starting to complain before seeing the whole picture? And doing solid math? Yes. I do blame them. But not for being fans.

(Of course, in the end they might be correct in the assessment that the ranger sucks. But at this point it is just a wild guess.)

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think the ranger is my favourite class in Level Up. I love spell-less rangers. If monks, rogues and barbarians can do lots of cool things without spells, rangers should too. Too many classes running around with spells make wizards seem like the least adept, since they are stuck with spellbooks.

I see no point in a spell less ranger. This would not be a D&D ranger for me.

And if you give them abilities that emulate spells. Why not give them spells in the first place...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think that is the problem.

The 2024 ranger looks like a good class.

Yes.

It's just bland and barely flavored like a ranger because WOTC only knows how to season with spells but won't create new ranger spells.

Do we need more? We just need some more balance there. We also don't know if wotc did design more spells. Or did you already see the new book?

 

[g00se99994]

I was convinced. I am really not seeing how this is fan blaming.

If you mean saying that there are people who are overreacting and starting to complain before seeing the whole picture? And doing solid math? Yes. I do blame them. But not for being fans.

(Of course, in the end they might be correct in the assessment that the ranger sucks. But at this point it is just a wild guess.)

Pretty bold to look at 1/2 of the fan base and say they are overreacting about seeing a class that was the worst designed from 2014, gets a redo in 2024 and is by far the least best reviewed. I'm seeing very constructive arguments about why this design is well behind all the rest.

 

[Minigiant]

I think the ranger is my favourite class in Level Up. I love spell-less rangers. If monks, rogues and barbarians can do lots of cool things without spells, rangers should too. Too many classes running around with spells make wizards seem like the least adept, since they are stuck with spellbooks.

And to me the LU ranger is a nerfed LU fighter in a green cloak with nonmagical versions of 1st and 2nd level spells. It's really only has a point if you use LU's exploration system that links them to the system.

That to me is the problem.

As D&D and D&D clones relax The limitations on various classes and allows them to pick abilities from other classes, The model of the third edition Ranger becomes a redundant because it was purposely created to make a character that didn't have those restrictions.

Basically if a fighter can pick up 1st level Druid spells and get expertise, what's the point of a ranger that just has nonmagical druid spells and expertise?

This is where getting into the flavor of the Rangers starts mattering. Allowing the Ranger to substitute themselves with logs, shoot explosive arrows, turn their arms into claws, silver and golden their swords, sync with a bird, grow gills and fins, and meld with the rocks. Etc etc.

 

[Minigiant]

Do we need more? We just need some more balance there. We also don't know if wotc did design more spells. Or did you already see the new book?

Yes

The ranger needs more spells.
When WOTC described every other class so far they highlighted a new spell.
When WOTC did UAs, they gave almost every caster class in new spell.


It is not a far-reach to say that because they did not mention them nor preview them, there are no new Ranger spells tailored to Rangers specifically.